A bench of Justices Vikramajit Sen and R K Agrawal, however, said one of the pre-requisites of Section 304B (dowry death) of the IPC that the woman should be subjected to dowry harassments 'soon before her death' for the offence being held as dowry death has to be ascertained by the courts only.
"In other words, there must be existence of a proximate and live link between the effect of cruelty based on dowry demand and the death concerned. If the alleged incident of cruelty is remote in time and has become stale enough not to disturb the mental equilibrium of the woman concerned, it would be of no consequence," the court said.
"Though the language used is 'soon before her death', no definite period has been enacted and the expression 'soon before her death' has not been defined in both the enactments.
"Accordingly, the determination of the period which can come within the term 'soon before her death' is to be determined by the courts, depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case," the court said.
"Soon before her death, the woman must have been subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relatives of her husband," it said, adding that such harassment must be "for, or in connection with, demand for dowry".
The observations have come in a verdict by which the court upheld the life term awarded to one Karamvir and his mother for harassing his wife for dowry that led her to commit suicide in 1996 in Rohtak in Haryana.