TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (8) TMI 1057
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e piece of printed cloth (chunni) near the dead body and another piece which was tied with the ceiling fan. Shri Naresh Tandon, brother-in-law of the deceased who was present at the site told Shri Jatav that the deceased had been subjected to harassment and torture by her husband and in-laws. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate recorded the statement of Smt. Raj Rani Mehra (mother of the deceased), who had also reached the house of the appellant and on that basis a case was registered under Sections 304B/306/498A read with Section 34 IPC. On the next day, Dr. Bharat Singh (PW-21) conducted post mortem. He found the following injuries on the body of the deceased: 1. One ligature mark around the neck placed above the thyroid cartilage which was present all around the neck. The width of the ligature was 3/4" all along except near the right side of the ear where it was irregular and was wider upto 1". Base was depressed. Skin was abraded. Colour was light brown. 2. One linear abrasion was present on the right knee joint size two and half inches x two and ten inches. Dr. Bharat Singh opined that the cause of death was asphyxia caused due to hanging. (ii) Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... CriLJ 36, Gokaraju Venkatanarasa Raju v. State of A.P. 1993 (3) SCALE 495 and Shivanand Mallappa Koti v. State of Karnataka AIR 2007 SC 2314 . Learned senior counsel then submitted that the judgments of this Court in Pyare Lal v. State of Haryana AIR 1999 SC 1563 and Satpal v. State of Haryana 1999 CriLJ 596 on which reliance has been placed by the High Court for convicting the appellant under Section 498A IPC are clearly distinguishable because in neither of those cases question similar to the one arising in this appeal was considered. 4. Shri P.P. Malhotra, senior counsel representing the State relied upon the provisions of Sections 221, 222 and 464 of the Code and argued that omission to frame specific charge under Section 498A IPC cannot be made a ground for acquittal of the appellant because absence of charge under that section did not prejudice his defence and no failure of justice was occasioned. Shri Malhotra submitted that the evidence produced by the prosecution was sufficient to prove that the appellant had subjected the deceased to cruelty and the High Court did not commit any error by convicting him under Section 498A IPC. 5. We have considered the respective su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) When a person is charged with an offence and facts are proved which reduce it to a minor offence, he may be convicted of the minor offence, although he is not charged with it. (3) When a person is charged with an offence, he may be convicted of an attempt to commit such offence although the attempt is not separately charged. (4) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to authorise a conviction of any minor offence where the conditions requisite for the initiation of proceedings in respect of that minor offence have not been satisfied. Illustrations (a) A is charged, under Section 407 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) with criminal breach of trust in respect of property entrusted to him as a carrier. It appears, that he did commit criminal breach of trust under Section 406 of that Code in respect of the property, but that it was not entrusted to him as a carrier. He may be convicted of criminal breach of trust under the said Section 406. (b) A is charged under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), with causing grievous hurt. He proves that he acted on grave and sudden provocation. He may be convicted under Section 335 of that Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... down that any error, omission or irregularity in the framing of charge including any misjoinder of charges, will not invalidate a finding, sentence or order by a court of competent jurisdiction unless the higher court comes to a conclusion that failure of justice has been occasioned. Sub-section (2) of Section 464 specifies the modes which can be adopted by the Court of appeal, confirmation or revision, if such court is of the opinion that a failure of the justice has been occasioned on account of non framing of charge or any error, omission or irregularity in the framing of charge. 7. The question whether omission to frame a charge or any error or irregularity in the charge, is by itself, sufficient for quashing the conviction of the accused was considered in Willie (William) Slaney v. State of M.P. 1956 CriLJ 291 . After examining the issue in detail, the Constitution Bench of this Court observed: Before we proceed to set out our answer and examine the provisions of the Code, we will pause to observe that the Code is a code of procedure and, like all procedural laws, is designed to further the ends of justice and not to frustrate them by the introduction of endless t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tate and the protection of society in general against protection from harassment to the individual and the risks of unjust conviction. Every reasonable presumption must be made in favour of an accused person; he must be given the benefit of every reasonable doubt. The same broad principles of justice and fair play must be brought to bear when determining a matter of prejudice as in adjudging guilt. But when all is said and done what we are concerned to see is whether the accused had a fair trial, whether he knew what he was being tried for, whether the main facts sought to be established against him were explained to him fairly and clearly and whether he was given a full and fair chance to defend himself. If all these elements are there and no prejudice is shown the conviction must stand whatever the irregularities whether traceable to the charge or to a want of one. 9. In Gurbachan Singh v. State of Punjab 1957 CriLJ 1009, a three Judges' Bench considered the question of prejudice and observed: In judging a question of prejudice, as of guilt, courts must act with a broad vision and look to the substance and not to technicalities, and their main co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ne for which he is tried but Section 306 IPC cannot be said to be a minor offence in relation to an offence under Section 302 IPC within the meaning of Section 222 CrPC for the two offences are of distinct and different categories. While the basic constituent of an offence under Section 302 IPC is homicidal death, those of Section 306 IPC are suicidal death and abetment thereof. 12. In view of the apparently conflicting judgments of the coordinate Benches, the issue was referred to a larger Bench. In Dalbir Singh v. State of U.P. 2004 CriLJ 2025, a three Judges' Bench considered the provisions of Section 222 and 464 of the Code and observed: Sub-section (1) of Section 222 lays down that when a person is charged with an offence consisting of several particulars, a combination of some only of which constitutes a complete minor offence, and such combination is proved, but the remaining particulars are not proved, he may be convicted of the minor offence, though he was not charged with it. Sub-section (2) of the same section lays down that when a person is charged with an offence and facts are proved which reduce it to a minor offence, he may be convicted of the minor o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....raboina Sreenu was not correctly decided as it purports to lay down as a principle of law that where the accused is charged under Section 302 IPC, he cannot be convicted for the offence under Section 306 IPC. 14. The ratio of the above noted judgments is that in certain situations an accused can be convicted of an offence with which he may not have been specifically charged and that an error, omission or irregularity in the framing of charge is, by itself not sufficient for upsetting the conviction. The appellate, confirming or revisional Court can interfere in such matters only if it is shown that error, omission or irregularity in the framing of charge has caused prejudice to the accused and failure of justice has been occasioned. 15. Reverting to the facts of this case, we find that the appellant and his co-accused were charged under Section 304B IPC. The specific allegation levelled against them was that they had subjected the deceased to cruelty for or in connection with demand for dowry and she had died unnatural death within seven years of her marriage. Thus, the appellant knew that he was to defend himself against the allegation of cruelty. The cross-examination of pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, such death shall be called 'dowry death', and such husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death. By virtue of explanation appearing below Sub-section (1), the word 'dowry' used therein carries the same meaning as is contained in Section 2 of The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. 19. The ingredient of cruelty is common to Sections 304B and 498A IPC, but the width and scope of two sections is different, inasmuch as Section 304B deals with cases of death as a result of cruelty or harassment within seven years of marriage, Section 498A has a wider spectrum and it covers all cases in which the wife is subjected to cruelty by her husband or relative of the husband which may result in death by way of suicide or cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) or even harassment caused with a view to coerce the woman or any person related to her to meet unlawful demand for property or valuable security. 20. In order to bring home charge under Section 304B IPC, the prosecution is required to e....