[Section 304B IPC] Message must go that anyone who commits offence of dowry death will be dealt with iron hand: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently has observed that the legislative intent of incorporating Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) is to curb the menace of dowry death [Ajhola Devi and Another v. State of Jharkhand]..A division bench of Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna said that a strong message must go to the society that a person who commits the offence of dowry death will be dealt with iron hand."The offence under Section 304B – offence of dowry death is the offence against society. A strong message must go in the society that a person who commits such an offence of dowry death and/or the offences under the Dowry Prohibition Act shall be dealt with an iron hand," the Court said. The Court, therefore, upheld an order of the Jharkhand High Court imposing a sentence of 10 years rigorous imprisonment on the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased woman. .The offence of dowry death is the offence against society.Supreme Court.The appellant-accused had moved the apex court contending that lesser punishment may be imposed upon them in view of their advanced age. The Court, however, noted that the deceased woman had died within one year of marriage and demand for dowry had been established and proved by the prosecution."The accused came out with a false case/theory that the deceased died because of Diarrhoea, which has not been established and proved by the defence. The minimum punishment for the offence of dowry death is 7 years and the maximum punishment is life imprisonment. The trial court has awarded the sentence of 10 years rigorous imprisonment," the Court said.It further opined that legislative intent of incorporating Section 304B was to curb the menace of dowry death with a firm hand. "In dealing with cases under Section 304B, such legislative intent has to be kept in mind. The offence under Section 304B – offence of dowry death is the offence against society. Such offences have serious impact upon society," the order stated.In the facts and circumstances of the case, imposing 10 years imprisonment cannot be said to be disproportionate to the offence committed, the Court held. It, therefore, dismissed the appeal..[Read Order]