LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/smt-bhagwati-devi-vs-state-of-uttarakhand-20250829/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Criminal · Reportable judgment

Smt. Bhagwati Devi vs State of Uttarakhand

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
29 August 2025
Case No.
Criminal Appeal No. 2616 of 2014
Result
Allowed
Bench
Aravind Kumar
Citation
[2025] 8 S.C.R. 2289 : 2025 INSC 1051
Acts & Sections
IPC
Supreme Court Reports [2025] 8 S.C.R. 2289 : 2025 INSC 1051
Issue for consideration
Issue arose whether the order of conviction u/s.498-A IPC and consequential sentence imposed on the appellant-mother-in-law can be sustained on the basis of the material evidence.
Headnote

Penal Code, 1860 – s.498-A – Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty – Dowry demand – Case of the complainant-father that his daughter was found dead inside the matrimonial home, and the accused personsfather-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in-law of the daughter were present in the house; that the daughter had committed suicide by hanging herself; that the daughter used to inform that her mother-in-law was commenting on her sarcastically for dowry, and that her husband was out of the city – Trial court convicted only the appellant-mother-in-law u/s.498-A and sentenced her, however acquitted others of the charges u/ss.302/34, 304-B and 498A – High Court upheld the same – Correctness:

Held: Order of conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable u/s.498-A and consequential sentence imposed cannot be sustained on the basis of the material evidence – Cumulative effect of the evidence of the witnesses-mother, father and brother of the girl, and the doctor would lead to the irresistible conclusion that the girl-deceased had not committed suicide on account of either demand for dowry being made or cruelty being inflicted on her – Neighbour of the appellant deposed that appellant had never made any demand for dowry, and that the deceased had informed her of not keeping well – She being neither the relative of the appellant nor belonging to the same community to which the appellant belongs would indicate that there was no interest in her to depose against the factual matrix or in favour of the appellant – Her evidence having been brushed aside by the courts below on the premise that she could not have deposed any fact with regard to the demand of dowry as it happens within the four walls is an erroneous finding – In such matters the word spreads faster than the wind about a daughter-in-law being harassed for the dowry by the parents in law – Such facts are conspicuously absent – Thus, the judgment of the High Court set aside and the appellant stands acquitted for offence u/s.498-A [Paras 11, 12] Penal Code, 1860 – s.498-A – Term cruelty – Meaning of, for purpose of s.498-A – Explained. [Para 8]

Keywords: Conviction u/s.498-A IPC · Dowry demand · Suicide by hanging · Material evidence · Cruelty · Word spreads faster than the wind · Daughter-in-law being harassed for the dowry by the parents in law

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

Judgment Aravind Kumar, J. 1. The Appellant herein who has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498-A of IPC is assailing the judgment rendered by the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital in Criminal Appeal No.174 of 2003 on 10.04.2014. 2. The son of the Appellant – Sh. Sanjay Mishra married Smt. Chandra Devi, the daughter of the complainant – Dharmanand Joshi (PW-1) according to Hindu customs and rites about a year prior to her death on 15.06.2001. PW-1 presented a complaint before Bagwshwar (P.S.) on 16.06.2001 alleging that his daughter was found dead inside the matri
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →