Ghaziabad: An additional district and sessions court on Saturday sentenced a resident of Madhuban Bapudham residential locality to life imprisonment for murdering his wife by suffocating her, and imposed a fine of Rs 11,000.The court held the accused, Rahul, guilty under Section 302 (murder) of IPC, observing that medical evidence conclusively established that the woman’s death was caused by suffocation due to deliberate blocking of her mouth and nose.
The case relates to an FIR registered at Kavinagar police station on June 12, 2020, based on a complaint by Suraj, a resident of Madhya Pradesh. In his complaint, Suraj stated that his cousin Jyoti was married to Rahul on April 22, 2016. Soon after, her husband started harassing her for dowry, and after prolonged torture, Jyoti was killed on June 12, 2020.Based on the complaint, a case was registered under sections 498A, 323, 304B of IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. After the police filed a chargesheet, the court took cognisance, and the matter was handed over to the sessions court for trial.The prosecution examined 10 witnesses, including family members, neighbours and the doctor who conducted the post-mortem. The doctor testified that Jyoti died due to asphyxiation — a condition caused by deprivation of oxygen — and clarified that such a death could occur only if both the mouth and nose were forcibly closed.“When this is medically established that death occurred by asphyxiation, it is not possible for anyone to hold their breath until death,” the court observed, negating the chances of death by suicide.The defence counsel alleged false implication of the accused. However, the court rejected this argument, holding that the medical findings clearly pointed to murder. While convicting Rahul for murder and causing hurt, the court acquitted him of charges related to dowry harassment and dowry death. The judge noted that the prosecution failed to prove any dowry demand preceding the incident, particularly when the family members did not corroborate that any demand for dowry was made soon before Jyoti’s death.“All the witnesses denied the demand for dowry by the accused, and also denied the cruelty related to the demand for dowry. Thus, the essential ingredients of Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code, namely, demand for dowry and cruelty related to the demand for dowry, were not proven,” the judge, Dr Dinesh Chandra Shukla, held.Accordingly, the court convicted Rahul under sections 302 and 323 of IPC, while acquitting him of charges under sections 498A and 304B of IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
