Bangalore District Court
Unknown vs Sameer Ahamad S/O Abdul on 20 December, 2021
CC.No.22712/2003
IN THE COURT OF THE X ADDL.C.M.M.
MAYO HALL UNIT, AT BENGALURU
Dated: This the 20th day of December 2021
PRESENT: Smt.ARATI B.KAMATE
B.A., LL.B.,
X Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
Bengaluru City.
C.C.No.22712/2003
Complaina State by, Police Sub Inspector
nt Halasuru Police Station
/vs/
Accused 1.Sameer Ahamad S/o Abdul
Suban, 28 years,
3. Hajirambi W/o Abdul Suban, 48
years,
Accused No.1 and 2 are
R/at 1st Main, Tippu Nagara,
Davanagere.
4. Abdul Basheer S/o Abdul
Khadar, 45 years, R/at No.644,
3rd Cross, Kodihalli, Bengaluru
JUDGMENT
1. The PSI of Halasuru police station has filed this charge sheet against the accused persons for the offences punishable u/S. 498(A), 109 of IPC and Sec. 3 and 4 of D.P Act.
CC.No.22712/2003
2. It is alleged by the prosecution that subsequent to marriage of CW1 with accused No.1 on 08092002, during her stay in the matrimonial house, the accused No.1 subjected her to physical and mental torture demanding more dowry at the instigation of accused No.3 and 4, inspite of receipt of dowry at the time of marriage. Hence, it is alleged that accused have committed the alleged offences.
3. On the basis of the FIS lodged by the informant, case was registered against the accused in Halasuru P.S., Cr.No.88/2003 and FIR was submitted to the court. On completion of investigation charge sheet has been filed against the accused persons for the alleged offences.
4. Cognizance of offence was taken and summons was issued to the accused persons. Accused persons appeared before the court through their counsel and they are on bail. Copies of chargesheet were furnished to accused persons u/S.207 of Cr.P.C. After hearing, charge was framed against the accused persons for the alleged offences. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
5. The prosecution in support of its case has examined 5 witnesses as PW.1 to 5, got marked 9 documents as Exs.P1 CC.No.22712/2003 to 9. The statement of the accused was recorded u/S.313 of Cr.P.C. They denied the incriminating materials available against them. They did not lead evidence. Two witnesses were examined as DW1 and 2 on behalf of the accused . They have produced the documents marked at Ex.D1 to 5.
6. Heard the arguments of Sr.APP appearing for the state and the counsel for accused persons and perused the records.
7. The following points arise for determination:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond doubt that subsequent to marriage of CW1 with accused No.1 on 08092002, during her stay in the matrimonial house, the accused No.1 harassed CW1 mentally and physically demanding more dowry at the instigation of accused No.3 and 4.
And thereby the accused have committed an offence punishable under Section. 498(A) of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond doubt that the accused No.3 and 4 instigated the accused No.1 to demand more dowry from CW1 and ill treat her. And thereby the accused have committed an offence punishable under Section 109 of IPC?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond doubt that even though the accused have received dowry, again demanded CW.1 to bring more dowry. And thereby the accused have committed an offence punishable under Section 3 and 4 of DP Act?
4. What order?
CC.No.22712/2003
8. The above points are answered in the following manner;
Point No.1 to 3 - Negative, Point No.4 As per final order, for the following;
REASONS
9. POINT NO.1 to 3: It is the case of prosecution that CW1 was subjected to physical and mental cruelty demanding more dowry inspite of receipt of dowry at the time of marriage by the accused. The criminal law was set into motion by CW1 by lodging FIS as per Ex.P1. She was examined by the prosecution as PW1. During her evidence she has stated that before marriage the accused demanded 2 lakhs rupees but her father could only pay Rs. 1 lakh. Accused were illtreating her demanding to bring the remaining amount. They were threatening that A 1 would pronounce Talaq against her if she did not bring amount. She further stated that bacause of repeated demands by the accused, her father paid a sum of Rs. 50,000/, Rs.10,000/ and sum of Rs. 10,000/ by way of cheque. A 1 again demanded and received from her father a sum of Rs.25,000/ to purchase bike. The accused also threatened her with life in case she fails to bring the CC.No.22712/2003 amount. Her sister and brotherinlaw came to Mumbai and brought her back to Bangalore when she informed about threat by the accused. She further stated that on 17.4.2003 the accused No.1 came along with his uncle, the president of Faruqya masjid committee Kodihalli and group of persons and forcibly took herself and her father to Masjid. The accused took the signatures of herself and her father forcibly on a blank paper in the Masjid. The maternal uncle of accused No.1 told her that they would get talaq by making use of blank paper if she fails to bring the remaining amount. In that regard she lodged FIS as per Ex.P1. She also deposed regarding drawing of mahazar as per Ex.P2. Invitation card and photographs were marked at Ex.P 4 to P 7. She has further stated that her father has given Rs.1 lakh by way of cheque to accused and her fatherinlaw got encashed the same.
10. PW.2 is the sister of CW1. She has deposed that the accused were illtreating CW1 demanding dowry. A1 was looking after her properly. They demanded 2 lakhs. Her father gave 1 lakh. The accused No.2 to 4 were repeatedly demanding CW.1 to bring the balance amount of Rs. 1 lakh and threatening that A.1 would pronounce Talaq against her if CC.No.22712/2003 amount not given. The accused were abusing CW.1 in filthy language and were alleging that on account of her coming into their family they are suffering bad luck. There after A1 brought CW.1 to Bangalore to their parents' house and on repeated demands of money made by the accused No.1 her father has paid a sum of Rs. 50,000/, again Rs.10,000/ and again another sum of Rs. 10,000/ by way of cheque drawn on Amanath Bank. The accused No.1 again demanded and obtained from her father a sum of Rs.25,000/ to purchase bike. Accused also threatened CW.1 with life if she fails to bring the remaining amount. She further stated when CW1 informed about threat given by accused, she and her husband brought CW.1 back from Mumbai to Bangalore. On 17.4.2003 the accused No.1 came along with his uncle and a group of persons and forcibly took CW.1 and her father to the Masjid. The accused forcibly took the signatures of her sister and her father on a blank paper in the Masjid. The maternal uncle of accused No.1 threatened that they would get Talaq by using blank paper if remaining amount is not given. The accused were assaulting her sister causing bleeding injuries.
CC.No.22712/2003
11. PW.3 has also deposed regarding demand of dowry by the accused and illtreatment to CW1 for dowry. He came to know from CW.1 over phone that accused were making galata with her for non payment of dowry and scolding her. She was also beaten by accused and she had asked him to come and take her. CW.1 lived with accused for about 45 months after marriage. The galata was taking place between accused and CW.1 for non payment of the dowry amount as demanded. CW.1 told him that the accused assaulted her causing bleeding injuries. Accused were abusing her in filthy language. He further stated that Rs.25,000/ was also given to accused to purchase vehicle after payment of Rs.1 lakh by way of cheque. On 17.4.2003 a Khulanama was got signed on a blank paper by accused by taking the signature of CW.1 without informing her. The Khulanama was got signed on the pretext of settling the marital dispute.
12. PW.4 deposed regarding receipt of FIS as per Ex.P.1 from CW1. He registered and handed over further investigation to CW.10. PW.5 deposed that he verified the documents and went to J.B.Nagar police station. He drew up mahazar in the presence of CW.1, 6 & 7 as per Ex.P2. He CC.No.22712/2003 secured marriage card as per Ex.P33 from CW.1. He recorded statements of witnesses. He filed chargesheet after completion of investigation.
13. The accused have examined two witnesses as DW1 and 2. DW1 has deposed that in the year 2003 CW1, 2 and 4 came to Masjid and gave one letter. They called both parties and held counseling, after which CW2 and 4 requested to give khulanama and told that CW1 is at fault. She is already married to one Suhael Ahmed. Hence khulanama was given and at that time CW2, 4, the members of Masjid and other public were present. DW2 has also stated that CW2 gave letter as per Ex.D4. CW1 was already married to one Suhael Ahmed. Khulanama was given at the instance of family of CW1.
14. The charges leveled against the accused are punishable under Sections 498A, 109 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of D.P.Act.
The ingredients of Sec. 498A are
a) The woman must be married.
b) She must be subjected to cruelty or harassment, and CC.No.22712/2003
c) Such cruelty or harassment must have been shown either by husband of the woman or by the relative of her husband.
The allegation of the informant is that the accused have subjected her to cruelty demanding dowry. These allegations are serious in dispute. In view of this, as per the settled position of law, the prosecution has to prove that the CW1 was subjected to cruelty by the husband and his relatives within the meaning prescribed under Section 498A of IPC. The marriage of CW1 and accused No.1 is admitted. But the accused have taken contention that the marriage of CW1 was performed with the accused No.1 without informing about her first marriage with one Suhael. The said contention of the accused is denied by the prosecution. The learned Cousnel for the accused relied on decision reported in ILR 2004 KAR 1322 between Raghothaman and others v. State of Karnataka. The learned Counsel also produced the copy of PCR filed against CW1 and her family by Suhael Ahmed. He argued that a false case has been filed when the accused did not allow CW1 to join after knowing about her first marriage with another person. PW1 has admitted that Suhael had filed PCR CC.No.22712/2003 No.141/03 before XI ACMM alleging cheating against herself and her family members. She has further admitted that no one would keep quiet if some unknown person makes false claim of being husband. If that person was not her husband, CW1 and her family members could not have kept quiet without initiating any action against him if false claim was made. She has also admitted that in that regard panchayat was held in the house of Steel Narayan. PW2 and 3 being the family members of PW1 showed ignorance regarding the filing of the said case. They have not denied filing of the said case. PW3 has stated that he does not know that marriage of CW1 was performed with accused No.1 without taking divorce from her first husband Suhael Ahmed. That supports the contention of accused regarding suppression of first marriage of CW1 with one Suhael Ahmed.
15. PW1 has stated that her signature was taken on blank paper. She has admitted that CW4 has signed the khulanama as a witness. When a suggestion was made to PW3 that khulanama bears signatures of CW1, her father, members of Masjid and himself he has stated that signatures were obtained on blank papers. PW1 has admitted that CC.No.22712/2003 subsequent to Khulanama she has received some of her belongings from JB Nagar police station. It is an admitted fact that CW4 is also one of the members of Masjid. The accused have taken contention that the father of CW1 had given letter to the Masjid stating that his daughter is at fault and later khulanama was issued. PW3 has stated that he does not remember whether father of CW1 had given letter to the Masjid saying that CW1 was already married with one Suhael @ Ravi. He has further admitted that panchayat was held in the Masjid and he attended the same. PW1 has also admitted that other persons also signed as witnesses to the Khulanama. The accused have examined DW1 and 2 in support of their defence. But no such suggestion was made to DW1 and 2 regarding taking of signatures on blank papers. A suggestion was made to DW1 that Ex.D5 does not bear the signature of CW1's father, which was admitted by the witness. But it bears the signature of CW1 and Ex.D4 bears the signature of her father.
16. It is alleged that the amount of Rs.1 lakh was given as dowry and the same was got encashed by the father of accused No.1. The prosecution has to prove on which date the CC.No.22712/2003 cheque was issued in the name of father of accused No.1 and also that the said cheque was given towards payment of dowry. PW1 has stated that before marriage the accused demanded 2 lakhs but her father could pay only 1 lakh. She has further stated that due to repeated demands for money her father paid Rs.50,000/, 10,000/ and Rs.10,000/ by way of cheque. During cross examination she has stated that amount of Rs. 1 lakh was given by way of cheque.
17. It is admitted during cross examination that the father of accused No.1 was staying at Sagar. It is admitted that the address shown in Ex.P8 is the same as of uncle of accused No.1. The accused have specifically denied issuance of cheque in favour of father of accused No.1 and encashment by him. It is an admitted fact that the names of father of accused No.1 and uncle are same. The address of uncle of accused No.1 is as shown in Ex.P8. In such circumstance, the prosecution has to prove that the amount was paid through cheque and the said cheque was got encashed by the father of accused No.1. But there is no evidence to show that the cheque was issued in favour of father of accused No.1 towards dowry and was got encashed by him.
CC.No.22712/2003
18. It is alleged that the accused have illtreated CW1 and she also sustained bleeding injuries due to assault. If she had sustained any such injury she could have taken treatment in the hospital. It is clear from the evidence that the father of accused No.1 was staying in the place of his work. The accused No.1 and CW1 were staying together. It is also clear that their relative by name Abdul Subaan was staying in Bombay for the purpose of his work. It is stated that the panchayat was held in his home. But he was also not examined.
19. There is lot of inconsistency in the evidence of witnesses as argued by the Learned Counsel for the accused. The prosecution has to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. After considering the materials on record, if two views are possible in such circumstance, the one which is favourable to the accused be considered. If any doubt arises, the benefit of the same should go to the accused persons. The facts and circumstances revealing from the evidence by itself are sufficient to extend benefit of doubt to the accused. By considering the facts and circumstances, the prosecution is CC.No.22712/2003 not able to prove the charges leveled against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, Point No.1 to 3 are answered in the Negative.
20. POINT NO.4: For the afore said reasons, the following order is passed;
ORDER Acting u/S.248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused No.1, 3 and 4 are acquitted of the offences punishable u/S. 498(A), 109 R/w 34 of IPC and sec. 3 and 4 of D.P Act.
Bail bond of accused No.1, 3 and 4 and surety stand cancelled.
(Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer, typed by her, same was corrected by me and then pronounced in open court on this the 20th day of December 2021).
(ARATI B.KAMATE) X A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.
CC.No.22712/2003
ANNEXURE
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED
Prosecution Defence
PW.1 Harshiya Jasmine DW.1 Jaffer Sharif PW.2 Hajira Jasmeen DW.2 Mohammed Waizoddin Khadri PW.3 Abdul Nazir PW.4 Meer Arif Ali PW.5 Sangram Singh Exhibits Marked Exhibits Marked Ex.P1 FIS. Ex.D1 Aadhar Card Ex.P1(a)Signature of PW.1. Ex.D2 Certified copy of letter Dated: 09042003 Ex.P1(b)Signature of PW.4. Ex.D3 Certified copy of letter dated: 1504 2003 along with translation Ex.P2 Mahazar Ex.D4 Certified copy of letter dated: 1704 2003 along with translation Ex.P2(a)Signature of PW.1. Ex.D5 Certificate copy of Kulanama along with translation Ex.P2(b)Signature of PW.5.
Ex.P3 Marriage Certificate Ex.P3(a)Signature of PW.5.
Ex.P4 to 7 Photos Ex.P8 True copy of cheque Ex.P9 FIR Ex.P9(a) Signature of PW.4.
Material Objects got marked NIL (ARATI B. KAMATE) X ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU.