When an accused is charged with Dowry Death he ought to have entered the witness box to prove his innocence beyond reasonable doubt; SC [Read the Judgment] Updated

A two Judge Bench of the Supreme Court while interpreting S.304B of IPC and S.113B of Indian Evidence Act has held that the Accused being charged of the commission of a dowry death ought to have entered the witness box themselves to prove his defence beyond reasonable doubt. In Sher Singh @ Partapa Vs. State of Haryana while dealing with S.304B IPC and S.113B Evidence Act interalia held as follows; The Prosecution can discharge the initial burden to prove the ingredients of S.304B even by preponderance of Probabilities Once the presence of the concomitants are established or shown or proved by the prosecution, even by preponderance of possibility, the initial presumption of innocence is replaced by an assumption of guilt of the accused, thereupon transferring the heavy burden of proof upon him and requiring him to produce evidence dislodging his guilt, beyond reasonable doubt. In Para-9 of the Judgment it is held as follows; "Since the burden of proving innocence beyond reasonable doubt shifts to the Accused in the case of a dowry death, as it has in the present case, it was imperative for the defence to prove the sequence of events which lead to the recording of the alleged Dying Declaration by the Tehsildar DW1. Provided that- He shall not be called as a witness except on his own request in writing; So the Comment that "Accused being charged of the commission of a dowry death ought to have entered the witness box themselves" is in clear violation of the Second Proviso to S.315.