Supreme Court Upholds Murder Conviction in Dowry Death Case: Husband’s Appeal Rejected

On November 6, 2019, the Supreme Court of India delivered a significant judgment in Javed Abdul Rajjaq Shaikh vs. State of Maharashtra, upholding the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for the murder of his wife. The Court dismissed his appeal and directed that he surrender to serve the remainder of his sentence. The case involved allegations of dowry harassment leading to the wife’s murder by throttling, with the trial court convicting multiple accused and the High Court later acquitting all except the appellant.

Background of the Case

The prosecution case was that the appellant, along with his family members, murdered his wife due to dowry-related demands. The deceased’s father lodged a complaint alleging that his daughter was harassed and tortured by the appellant and his family for failing to provide half a tola of gold, clothes, and Rs. 5000 for a bakery business. The deceased was allegedly subjected to physical abuse and food deprivation, and threats were made against her life.

Following the complaint, an investigation was conducted, and charges were filed under Sections 302 and 498A IPC. The trial court convicted the appellant and three other accused (his parents and brother) under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. However, the High Court, upon appeal, acquitted the co-accused and upheld the appellant’s conviction under Section 302 IPC.

Key Legal Issues

The primary legal issues addressed in the case included:

• Whether the prosecution had established beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was guilty of murdering his wife.
• Whether the evidence was sufficient to convict the appellant under Section 302 IPC.
• Whether the High Court was justified in convicting the appellant after acquitting the co-accused.

Arguments of the Appellant

The appellant’s counsel made the following arguments in his defense:

• The prosecution’s case was based on a collective act under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. Since the High Court acquitted the co-accused, convicting the appellant alone was legally untenable.
• The deceased had died by suicide due to personal frustration over not having a child, rather than due to any act committed by the appellant.
• The post-mortem report was prepared after several months, creating doubts about its credibility.
• The medical evidence did not conclusively establish throttling as the cause of death.
• The appellant had himself taken the deceased to the hospital, which was inconsistent with an accused attempting to cover up a murder.

Arguments of the Respondent (State of Maharashtra)

The State’s counsel countered these claims, arguing:

• The post-mortem findings, including injuries and crushed neck muscles, conclusively proved that the deceased was strangled and did not die by suicide.
• The appellant’s false defense—claiming that his wife had died by hanging—was contradicted by medical evidence, further proving his guilt.
• The deceased’s custodial death, occurring in the marital home at night, placed the burden on the appellant to explain the circumstances, which he failed to do.
• Witness testimonies, particularly from the deceased’s father and aunt, established the pattern of dowry harassment and the appellant’s threats to kill his wife.

Findings of the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court analyzed the evidence and made the following crucial observations:

1. Evidence of Dowry Harassment

The Court noted that multiple witnesses, including the deceased’s father and aunt, testified about persistent dowry demands and threats made by the appellant. The deceased had returned to her parental home for two months due to the harassment and was taken back only after intervention by relatives.

2. Medical Evidence and Cause of Death

The post-mortem report, corroborated by medical experts, revealed that the deceased had been throttled, leading to asphyxia and cardio-respiratory failure. The Court observed:

“The injuries sustained by the deceased, including bruising and crushing of the sternomastoid muscles and fractured thyroid cartilage, indicate a case of homicidal strangulation rather than suicidal hanging.”

3. False Defense of Suicide

The appellant had claimed that his wife died by hanging. However, medical findings showed:

• No ligature marks consistent with hanging.
• Signs of external violence, including bruising and crushing injuries.
• Absence of telltale features of hanging, such as stretched neck and saliva dribbling.

The Court ruled that the false explanation given by the appellant was an incriminating factor.

4. Applicability of Section 302 IPC

The Supreme Court rejected the appellant’s contention that his conviction was legally unsound due to the acquittal of co-accused. It held that:

“Where custodial deaths occur within the marital home, and the husband fails to provide a plausible explanation, the burden shifts on him under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act. The chain of circumstantial evidence unerringly points to the guilt of the appellant.”

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the appellant’s conviction under Section 302 IPC. The Court ordered that the appellant, who had been released on bail, be taken into custody immediately to serve his life sentence.

Legal Implications of the Judgment

This ruling has several important legal implications:

• Reaffirms that in custodial deaths within the marital home, the burden shifts to the husband to explain the circumstances.
• Strengthens the evidentiary value of medical reports in establishing cause of death.
• Establishes that false defenses can be considered as corroborative evidence against the accused.
• Clarifies that a conviction under Section 302 IPC can stand even if co-accused are acquitted, provided the evidence against the main accused is strong.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s judgment in Javed Abdul Rajjaq Shaikh vs. State of Maharashtra reinforces the need for strict legal scrutiny in dowry death cases and custodial killings within the marital home. By dismissing the appellant’s claims and upholding his conviction, the ruling serves as a strong precedent for cases involving domestic violence and strangulation-related deaths. The judgment highlights the role of medical evidence, the significance of false defenses, and the necessity of placing responsibility on the husband in cases of unexplained deaths within the matrimonial household.

Petitioner Name: Javed Abdul Rajjaq Shaikh.
Respondent Name: State of Maharashtra.
Judgment By: Justice K.M. Joseph, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul.
Place Of Incident: Maharashtra.
Judgment Date: 06-11-2019.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Javed Abdul Rajjaq S vs State of Maharashtra Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 06-11-2019.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Murder Cases
See all petitions in Dowry Cases
See all petitions in Domestic Violence
See all petitions in Judgment by K.M. Joseph
See all petitions in Judgment by Sanjay Kishan Kaul
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments November 2019
See all petitions in 2019 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category