Supreme Court : Impleading distant relatives and strangers in domestic violence proceeding is impermissible

 In the petition filed by Respondent No. 2, apart from arraying her husband and her parents-in-law as parties to the proceedings, has included all and sundry, as Respondents. To say the least, she has even alleged certain actions said to have been done by the tenant whose name is not even known to her. {Para 3}

4. In a matter of this nature, we are of the opinion that the High Court at least should have directed that the petition filed by Respondent No. 2 be confined to her husband as also her parents-in-law and should not have allowed the impleadment of Respondent Nos. 4 to 12.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 43 of 2013 (SLP (Crl.) No. 8522 of 2010)

Decided On: 07.01.2013

Ashish Dixit and Ors. Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

H.L. Dattu and C.K. Prasad, JJ.

Citation: (2013) AIR SC 1077,MANU/SC/0156/2013.

Print Page

Precaution to be taken by court if distant relatives of husband are prosecuted for dowry death

While we do not find any ground to interfere with the
view taken by the courts below that the deceased was
subjected to harassment on account of non-fulfillment of dowry
demand, we do find merit in the submission that possibility of
naming all the family members by way of exaggeration is not
ruled out. In Kans Raj, this Court observed :
 “5………A tendency has, however, developed for
roping in all relations of the in-laws of the
deceased wives in the matters of dowry deaths
which, if not discouraged, is likely to affect the
case of the prosecution even against the real
culprits. In their over enthusiasm and anxiety to
seek conviction for maximum people, the parents
of the deceased have been found to be making
efforts for involving other relations which
ultimately weaken the case of the prosecution
even against the real accused as appears to have
happened in the instant case.”
The Court has, thus, to be careful in summoning
distant relatives without there being specific
material. Only the husband, his parents or at best
close family members may be expected to
demand dowry or to harass the wife but not
distant relations, unless there is tangible material
to support allegations made against such distant
relations. Mere naming of distant relations is not
enough to summon them in absence of any
specific role and material to support such role.
 Moreover, ingredient of offence under Section 304B is not
mere demand of dowry but “cruelty or harassment” for or in
connection with demand of dowry. In Amar Singh vs. State
of Rajasthan3
, it was observed :
“29. ……….. What is punishable under Section
498-A or Section 304-B IPC is the act of cruelty or
harassment by the husband or the relative of the
husband on the woman. It will be also clear from
Section 113-B of the Evidence Act that only when
it is shown that soon before her death a woman
has been subjected by any person to cruelty or
harassment for, or in connection with, any demand
for dowry, the court shall presume that such
person had caused the dowry death within the
meaning of Section 304-B IPC. The act of
subjecting a woman to cruelty or harassment for,
or in connection with, any demand for dowry by
the accused, therefore, must be established by the
2 (2007) 15 SCC 415
3 (2010) 9 SCC 64
prosecution for the court to presume that the
accused has caused the dowry death.”
11. The Court has to adopt pragmatic view and when a girl
dies an unnatural death, allegation of demand of dowry or
harassment which follows cannot be weighed in golden scales.
At the same time, omnibus allegation against all family
members particularly against brothers and sisters and other
relatives do not stand on same footing as husband and
parents. In such case, apart from general allegation of
demand of dowry court has to be satisfied that harassment
was also caused by all the named members.
12. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, even
if it is accepted that the appellants were involved in raising the
demand for dowry there is material that the appellants
harassed the victim resulting in her death. Normally, it is the
husband or parents of the husband who may be benefitted by
the dowry and may be in a position to harass and not all other
relatives, though no hard and fast rule can be laid down in that
regard.
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1797 OF 2012
MONJU ROY & ORS
V
STATE OF WEST BENGAL 
Citation:(2015) 13 SCC693
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.

Print Page