304b - chargesheet not filed even after 5 months.

Dear, I think you should wait for the chargesheet to be filed..... Presumed is a strong presumption when other requirements are met, but in your case other requirements like live link is missing ..... Kapil Chandna Adv 9899011450

Hi, For charge sheet..still have more time. Don't worry about ur case. Really if ur an innocent, definitely you won't be punished. Its very difficult for me to write like u. So, share your contact no by Private Message really if u need a suggestion and guidance.

S.304 B is read with S.113 B of Indian evidence act which presumes guilt of the accused if there is a demand of dowry alleged 'soon' before death/ unnatural death /and within 7 years of marriage.

Any body telling you ---'f ur an innocent, definitely you won't be punished.'      

like the gentleman above is living in a fool's paradise.The presumption in such cases is very strong....and the onus to prove Innocence is yours.Get your act together...break the continuing line of the prosecution story once you get the chargesheet and copies of S.161 statements.

Sidharth Arora

Adv. Delhi High Court

9560601768

 

Is it worth it to push for chargesheet (if yes, how) or do I simply bide my time and wait for the police to take their time. It is already over 150 days. .....

Wait.... let the statements and prosecution story come.Your lawyer should be very very sharp during trial.

in 304b the police has only to prove that :-

 

1. there was a marriage
2. then there was death of bride
3. the death was within 7 years of marriage
4. death is unnatural

If these fats are there (which appear YES from your query) then it is presumed to be dowry death and all her friends and relative do not need any evidence to give.

 

It is for you to prove that the alleged crime was not done by you or else you ar in for 7 years.

Does that mean that anybody can say anything and we spend all of our time trying to prove them false?

Wherever you go for evidence nobody gives any information either because they are afraid of being sucked into a police case or they cite that data privacy as a clause and ask for a police or magistrate order. How can private individuals fight against the might of the state if their hands are tied.

And if the job of the police is to check only the 4 items above then why are they taking ages to file the chargesheet (it is more than 7 months now but there is still no chargesheet yet). These are facts which even I do not deny and the police knows this within the first 5 minutes of reaching the crime scene. If these are the only facts which the police has to check, there was no need for them to lock me up in jail for 70 days. They could have filed the chargesheet the very next day.

When speaking to me privately even the police admits that it is a fabricated case - then why is it that the police is so helpless? What kind of law is this that believes in harassing people even though everybody acknowledge that it is a false one. I can take it if it is only me. But they have implicated my sick mother and my little sister and she is being constantly harassed by her in-laws now.

you are not the first or last 304b accused.

 

getting emotional is natural but this may not help.  You have to plan your defence in consultation with lawyers.

A very unfair law. A part of a long list of unfair and badly crafted laws. But I disagree with the view that the police does not require evidence or suspicion before arresting or laying charges.

 

IPC 304B: Where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or har­assment by her husband or any relative of her husband for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, and such husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death. ......

 

Further, section 113B of Indian Evidence Act only confirms the above explanation. In fact, section 113B of Evidence Act repeats and submit to what is laid down in 304B.

113B: Presumption as to dowry death.- when the question is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it is shown that soon before her death such woman has been subjected by such 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.

Explanation.-For the purposes of this section "dowry death" shall have the same meaning as in section 304B, of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)

 

Further Crpc 174 only makes it mandatory to investigate a suicide/death of a woman within seven years of her marriage and to report the investigation to the Magistrate, but, it doesn’t give anyone a right to arrest or lay charges without evidence or without a reasonable suspicion.

 

Unless anything else can be added from the current standing laws or from a significant Court judgment, I do not agree that the police or the Magistrate can authorize arrest or charges without prima facie evidence in the case of a death of a woman within seven years of her marriage. I’m ignorant of law so I do not mind being corrected.

 

India is a democracy not to be proud of but I do not think the police is free to arrest people without any evidence or a reasonable suspicion of wrong doing. For the sake of an innocent citizen’s right to freedom, I hope the Magistrates would stop sending people to judicial custody without a valid reason.

 

The complainant can himself/herself claim to be a witness of dowry harassment and of course that is oral evidence and may meet the prima facie criteria. But if the Investigating Officer, after/during investigation, has evidence that the complainant is lying, then, such oral evidence should be held unreliable/incredible and it should not result in an arrest or a charge under 304B.

 

 

Along with unqualified, under-educated, and under-trained police officers, another serious defect in the justice system is that I see Magistrates in my district who look like they have yet to celebrate their 30th birthday. A person should have at least 20 years of experience as a trial-lawyer before he/she is considered for the post of a Judge/Magistrate. The candidate should also have a certain number of successful cases under his/her belt. Why are the book-worms being made Magistrates without having the street experience? A lawyer with 20 years of experience behind him will easily spot lies of the complainant, witnesses, police officers, or the accused. An experienced/successful lawyer will smell a fabricated case from 20 miles away. 

 

The list of defects is very long in our justice system but another major one is that the lawmakers, it seems, did not have the time to properly write laws: a lot of laws r written very vaguely. Example: 498a: (a) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide. Ur inlaws can say, "O officer, my son-in-law and his family shamelessly asked my daughter for a divorce which drove her to suicide so pls put 498a on him and his family." Shouldn’t the lawmakers have a responsibility to not make vague laws? Is it too much to ask? Or is this a sign of the quality of Indian intellect? And in section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act, the lawmakers have the temerity to refer to 498a when they say, "Explanation.-For the purposes of this section, "cruelty" shall have the same meaning as in section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)." Where do they get the guts to refer from once vague law to another vague law?   

Along with unqualified, under-educated, and under-trained police officers, another serious defect in the justice system is that I see Magistrates in my district who look like they have yet to celebrate their 30th birthday.

So are many doctors, teachers,  engineers, CA, Armed Forces Officer even drivers......... etc

A person should have at least 20 years of experience as a trial-lawyer before he/she is considered for the post of a Judge/Magistrate.

Let us see if you can find out a twenty years experienced advocate excepting such salary.

The candidate should also have a certain number of successful cases under his/her belt. Why are the book-worms being made Magistrates without having the street experience?

Better you challnage the Recruitment Rules for judiciary.  Get a judge appointed s per revised procedure and till then seek stay on the proceedings

A lawyer with 20 years of experience behind him will easily spot lies of the complainant, witnesses, police officers, or the accused. An experienced/successful lawyer will smell a fabricated case from 20 miles away. 

 There will be many lawyers who have 20 years of experience and not attended even a single criminal case

The list of defects is very long in our justice system but another major one is that the lawmakers, it seems, did not have the time to properly write laws:

You  are talking of 20 years of experience before joining judiciary and you are not aware of the length of experience (including as advocate) for those who draft the laws before being presented to legislature.

a lot of laws r written very vaguely. Example: 498a: (a) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide. Ur inlaws can say, "O officer, my son-in-law and his family shamelessly asked my daughter for a divorce which drove her to suicide so pls put 498a on him and his family." Shouldn’t the lawmakers have a responsibility to not make vague laws? Is it too much to ask? Or is this a sign of the quality of Indian intellect? And in section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act, the lawmakers have the temerity to refer to 498a when they say, "Explanation.-For the purposes of this section, "cruelty" shall have the same meaning as in section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)." Where do they get the guts to refer from once vague law to another vague law?   

No Law is drafted vague.  You are welcome to quote even a single law (or single amendment) which is :-

(i)                Not open to interpretation

(ii)             Not misused.

(iii)           Not created due to necessity.

 

 

Hello, don't waste your time here. Contact SIFF team in Delhi. They work for harassed husbands like you. They can provide you far better guidance than any lawyers. And dont pay a penny to anyone...especially your inlaws. remember, you cannot always be defensive in a legal fight....u have to be offensive. if they threaten you, record it and file cases against them...Its a game of chess and you have to checkmate your opponents...i needn't say more.