Told the accused in dowry harassment case, “Give land in the name of daughters, only then you will get relief”

The Supreme Court came down heavily on a man convicted in a dowry harassment case. The court said, “The whole day, sometimes Saraswati Puja and sometimes Lakshmi Puja at home, and then such activities.” The comments were made when the accused filed an appeal against his one-and-a-half year sentence. The court suggested that relief could be considered if the accused transferred some land in the name of his daughters.

Background of the case

This case is from Jharkhand, where petitioner Yogeshwar Sao was convicted under section 498A (dowry harassment) of the Indian Penal Code in 2015. The trial court had sentenced him to two and a half years’ imprisonment. The allegation was that he had demanded dowry of Rs 50 thousand from his wife. The couple were married in 2003 and have two daughters.

The wife had also alleged that the accused forcefully removed her uterus. However, no concrete evidence was found on this allegation, and it was rejected by the court.

Supreme Court’s comment

The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice N. Kotishwar Singh, who was involved, said during the hearing of the appeal,
“You don’t care about your own daughters. How can such a cruel person be allowed to come to court again and again?”

The court put a condition to give relief to the accused. The bench said that if Yogeshwar Sao gives some part of his farming land in the name of his daughters, then some relief can be given to his punishment. The court made it clear that this step is necessary to secure the future of the daughters.

Court proceedings and decisions

• 2015: The trial court found Yogeshwar guilty and sentenced him to two and a half years.
• Jharkhand High Court’s decision: The accused was given relief after 11 months of imprisonment and the sentence was suspended.
• September 2024: The High Court again found the accused guilty and sentenced him to one and a half years’ imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs 1 lakh.
• December 2024: The convict filed an appeal in the Supreme Court against the sentence.

Strong rebuke from the court

Expressing displeasure over the actions of the accused, the Supreme Court said, “There is no reason to give relief to a person who does not even take care of his daughters.” The court made it clear that the decision to transfer land in the name of daughters is important for their safety and future.

Woman’s allegations and court’s opinion

The wife had alleged that the husband forcibly got her uterus removed. However, the court acquitted the accused due to lack of evidence in this case. But in the dowry harassment case the accused was punished.