The accused who were charged with the offence punishable under Section 304B of the IPC acquitted of the said charge by learned sessions judge Haridwar. However, in appeal carried by the father of the deceased the verdict of acquittal was set aside and the appellants after conviction under section 304-B of IPC stand sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life
On the basis of the complaint, by the second respondent dated 23.01.2011 at 5.00 pm, an FIR was lodged under Section 304B of the IPC. On 23.01.2011 at about 9.30 am he received a phone call from his deceased daughter to come at Haridwar otherwise they will kill her on that day. So they went there. The dead body of the daughter was found in the car given by them in marriage. The death of the daughter was caused by poison and the appellants were responsible. This was said by the deceased’s father. In the year 2009, The deceased told the Doctor that she was an old patient of TB. Markedly, the deceased was found to have a weight of only 39 kilograms, which was found to be below the normal limit. Again another Gynaecologist, also treated her on 31.08.2010. The Doctor clearly deposed about the patient telling about the history of TB in the stomach this shows that it can be a natural death.
Session court said that the prosecution was unable to prove that the deceased died due to poison. From the search in the house of the deceased, no poisonous substance was found. PW1 and PW2 had demanded of Rs.10 lacs. The Sessions Judge even finds that apart from the fact that the said fact is not clearly proved there is ample evidence to show that the deceased was a patient of Tuberculosis. This may be the cause of her death. It has been found that this is not a dowry death. There is no charge under the Section 304-B not being proved, the appellants were acquitted
The High Court finds that the prosecution has duly proved that the deceased was killed due to cruelty and harassment for dowry and that it proved the ingredients of cruelty and harassment in connection with the demand for dowry immediately before the death
On 2/12/20 The supreme court said that
The High Court, in our view, without any justification, reversed the acquittal. The High Court has sought to draw support from the circumstance that the dead body of the deceased was recovered from the car. The first appellant has a case that he has taken the deceased to certain hospitals. There is also a case that they themselves notified the Police. We find it certainly not a circumstance so as to draw an inference that the deceased died an unnatural death or that the appellants administered poison to her. The appeals are only to be allowed. We thus allow the Appeals. The impugned judgment of the High Court is set aside and the judgment of the Sessions Judge is restored.