<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Sugna Bai\u2019s husband had set her on fire and her story ended in flames. But her voice, even in her last breath, helped the Supreme Court to hold her husband guilty of her death and flagged continued prevalence of violence against women in the country.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh dismissed the appeal filed by Shankar, affirming the concurrent findings of the trial court and the Rajasthan High Court and upheld the life imprisonment of the man convicted of murdering his wife, Sugna Bai, by setting her on fire.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Supreme Court of India has upheld the life imprisonment of a man convicted of murdering his wife, Sugna Bai, by setting her on fire, while delivering a strong commentary on the continuing prevalence of violence against women in India and said
“patriarchy still permeates the everyday.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“After decades of laws, schemes, reforms, and judicial recognition of equality across workplaces, homes, personal relationships, and even the armed forces, why does the control over women\u2019s bodies, choices, and lives still persist so deeply within society? Perhaps, the answer lies only with \u201cWe, the
People of India,” a bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh said while dismissing the appeal filed by Shankar, affirming the concurrent findings of the trial court and the Rajasthan High Court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A local court in Rajasthan had earlier found him guilty under Sections 302 (murder) and 342 (wrongful confinement) of the Indian Penal Code. The case dates back to October 2012, when Sugna Bai, aged 20, suffered severe burn injuries after her husband allegedly assaulted her, poured kerosene, and set her ablaze inside their rented home in Bundi district. She succumbed to her injuries days later.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“The coexistence of progress and violence signals to a paradox. Legal and economic advancements are visible on a macro-level, but patriarchy still permeates the everyday,” the court said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“Dowry is outlawed and has been for decades but the social legitimacy that sustains it is yet to be dismantled.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The judgment goes beyond the individual case to highlight a broader societal concern. The court underscored that welfare schemes can incentivize education, but cannot alter long-held beliefs about
women\u2019s roles within marriage and family. As a result, practices such as domestic abuse or even extreme acts like burning a wife (such as in this case) persist not as aberrations, but as indications of a disease afflicted social order, the top court said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The apex court placed significant reliance on the victim\u2019s dying declaration, in which she clearly named her husband as the perpetrator. Rejecting the defence\u2019s argument that the declaration was unreliable, the court noted that it was recorded by a magistrate after medical certification of her condition. It held that there was no evidence of tutoring or coercion, and that the statement was consistent with medical findings. The court also observed that minor procedural lapses, such as the declaration being written on the reverse side of a paper, did not undermine its evidentiary value.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Citing data from the National Crime Records Bureau, the bench noted that over 4.48 lakh crimes against women were recorded in 2023, with thousands of deaths linked to dowry violence each year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
India has experienced significant
economic growth, rising literacy, and increased participation of women in education and the workforce. Gender Roles do not apply strictly anymore in many urban areas, the court underlined.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The court opined that one cannot assume that all house-hold related work falls to the woman, whereas it is only the male who is tasked with bread winning.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“Yet, in rural and semi-urban scenarios, patriarchy remains a facet of everyday life.
Authority within the household is still overwhelmingly male, and women\u2019s autonomy is often conditional and constrained,” the top court said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“Even if the woman earns, it would still be expected of her that she would
set the house right before leaving for work, and busily engage herself in similar work including preparation of meals, when she
returns from work.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Concluding with a poignant remark, the court stated that the answer to why such crimes continue to occur \u201clies only with \u2018We, the People of India\u2019,\u201d calling for a deeper societal introspection beyond legislative and judicial measures.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Sugna Bai\u2019s husband had set her on fire and her story ended in flames. But her voice, even in her last breath, helped the Supreme Court to hold her husband guilty of her death and flagged continued prevalence of violence against women in the country. A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":8531,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_wppp_is_locked":false,"_wppp_selected_plans":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[67,70,68,71,72,69,73,1],"tags":[58,57,65,61,63,64,66,60,62,59,56,55,54],"class_list":["post-8530","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-all-high-courts","category-allahabad-high-court","category-gauhati-high-court","category-gujarat-high-court","category-madras-high-court","category-rajasthan-high-court","category-sikkim-high-court","category-supreme-court","tag-crimes-against-women-india","tag-domestic-violence-india","tag-dowry-violence-india","tag-gender-justice-india","tag-ipc-section-302","tag-ncrb-crime-data","tag-nongmeikapam-kotiswar-singh","tag-patriarchy-in-india","tag-rajasthan-high-court-verdict","tag-sanjay-karol-judge","tag-sugna-bai-case","tag-supreme-court-of-india","tag-wife-burning-case-india"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8530","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8530"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8530\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8532,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8530\/revisions\/8532"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/8531"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8530"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8530"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8530"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}