This article has been written by Harshita Chaudhary. She completed her bachelor’s in Science from Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Maharaj University, Kanpur, and is now in her second year, currently pursuing an LLB from Lloyd School of Law, Greater Noida.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SIVAKUMAR & ORS.
V.
STATE REP. BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE ETC. (SC 116)
Case Number- Criminal Appeal No. 001404 – 001405
SLP(Criminal) No. 000279 – 000280
Bench- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI and HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH
Petitioner(s)- 1-P.SIVAKUMAR, 2- A. PADMA , 3-PADMANABHAN @ AYYAAVU
Respondent(s)- 1-STATE REP. BY THE DEPUTY SUPRINTENDENT OF POLICE , 2-S. BEULA
Facts of the case:
- P. Sivakumar was married to S. Beula, soon after their marriage disputes arose between the parties and they started living separately.
- The wife filed complaint before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari. After investigation, the charge sheet was filed for the offences punishable under Section 498-A IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 against the four accused, namely, accused No.1-husband, 2-mother in law, 3-Father- In- Law, 4- Brother- In -Law.
- The trial was conducted before the Judicial Magistrate, Court in Nagarcoli Kanyakumari District, Tamil Nadu. In The end of the trial, the Judge acquitted all the accused persons of all the offences charged with.
- Against the order of the trial court, the State and the Wife filed a Revision Petition before the High Court. The appeal was partly allowed. By the judgment and order, the acquittal of all the accused was set aside and they were convicted for the offences punishable under Section 498- A IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Then matter went to the Supreme Court.
Arguments from Appellant’s Side-
Mr. S.Nagamuthu was the senior counsel for the appellants argued that the marriage between the parties has been held to be null and void by the judgment of the High Court Of Madras, Madurai Bench.
Case Cited From the Appellant’s Side- Shivcharan lal verma V. State Of Madhya Pradesh In that case Supreme Court held that the conviction under Section 498-A of IPC shall not be done when marriage is null and void. The Court Further declared that for the purpose of conviction under 498A of IPC, Valid Marriage is important ingredient.
Arguments From the Respondent’s Side-
Dr. Joseph Aristotle was the learned counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu and Mr. Vinodh was the learned counsel of the wife of the appellant. It was argued that even when marriage is null and void and conviction under 498-A of IPC is not sustainable as per judgement given by the Supreme Court in the case of Shivcharan Lal Verma V. State of Madhya Pradesh, but the conviction under Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act would still remain.
Judgement:
Court held that, the marriage between the appellant and his wife has been found to be null and void and the conviction under Section 498-A of IPC would not be sustainable, And For the Conviction under Section 3 and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act Court stated that the Judgement passed by Trial Court were held to be valid. As the trial court by an elaborate reasoning, arrived at after appreciation of evidence, has found that the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, The Supreme Court quashed the judgement of the High Court Of Madras and held the judgement passed by the trial court as valid. So all the appellants were acquitted from the charges.[i]
[i] See, https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/116-p-sivakumar-v-state-9-feb-2023-459591.pdf ( last visited Nov. 05,2024)
