Karnataka High Court
The State By Afzalpur Police Station vs Kashinath @ Rukku on 11 June, 2009
Author: K.Sreedhar Rao
Bench: K.Sreedhar Rao
we -'N-H5: Him-1% 23:12:22 Ea'? <31: KARNA'E'AE«iA <:::z--~z<,:u:'1"¢A'i:§E;?§«€LV§i <;1}E,%i.,§:§AE€GA,"""'"- __ V _;J>m'£s::L> Wis '§'ms*: 1 1:2: :_;>A\r 2 "
E>z<a£§:~;:§§:«§;§jf .(,..» % A V' 'i'E-{E2 H(f)N'E3Li%: M352. JE}'S'I'I{§:1t§' ¥'§§§f';E§3*ij£':f.E.21E~L5i;£4i"E%i;¥';€.} THE: E"-£C}§\f'§}:5I,',§MEQ.§%;'i%§{i%I_(3%%%f':'%3§f§.n£?s,i.{§:VVfi§;%(}fia§%EAai <Z5f_~%'fE£;}§.E~§%?il:--VP{}.5§>}g§gi;V.fi§f?1)VI"§:2'¥"'f:2{}«:}:§ I;=§§:%::~*1«=~g,x.;*2s[:£'s:z'».:-; 4. 1111 'V ' 1' '5 '}'7'h<: Siam «5*xf'2;_81§}'a:i9 A: . "
§"'t;1_i::t: Sf;a¥;i()r1. » ' ' ...A;:;;§)<-:E1s1:'i,%,.. (By Sm: A;:;:;mc::J1g m%;,¢,a;, Acid}. 3%) 1 . E<:g?is.~:_ ti;i:1;é.t13 R[_%:1{'k1,i a 0 Ei)}f1:~3: €'£'11 £2151':-:x§%;_e.;£':
Agit: :22 ji;'%3a1'*:i; 'V "
é 'I.'},i"1<:<:r;:f_:.z ._ ,{<:£E'Z_3<2%s.{a}'t:_a C'.".:hava,:I'i !':§§_< '".'L'2__ E3353 3%-';5M1.'$. V . V ' 3 , {.':'h1a:':a:i1_z_bz;ti.
_ 4__"3.i'J/.¥:} I§1'if33€3I'1l ('§§'1ava1z 'Eggs: 45 yffiél.I'S E E All are residents of Baratagi Tanda J Tq.Akl-calkot ' Soiapur District. .. ~ . , 3 -
(By Sn' Sudheer Kuikaini, Adv. for to 3) V This Cri111inalAppeal_.is filed--~uiidei'=..SectioI1~3?3[1) & (3) of the Code of Criminal Pr'o'cedu_'i'e,_ pii'ayVi1f1'g_to grant leave to file an appeal against the .,Ji1dgeni_efEit} of '2.S.6;2,004 passed by the II Add}. Sessions J1.1dge,_"C};11baJ}ga"*iI1"*Sv.---C.No.14-9/2002 acquitting the I'(-:Sp0r_ide_r1t~ zacciisedé 11.o.--1 forzthe offence under Sections 3,4 and o'E;~[iI3v'.P. i"/w"'3_4"o'1'iPC and U/s 304-13 R/W Sec. 34 of A-2 for the oifence U /S 498-A r/w 34 of IPC a,rid.:f_U,{S ear 'op- Act. r/w 34 of we and U /3 30-4eBt,arn:1_ 306,. of {Po r/w-1346f me. This oI1 for hearing this day, SREEDHAR J, de_1ive1=ed following: - ."'-I'he" ofg_the prosecution that one Kashibai ~ the accused no.1 {A 1). A2 and A3 are the do-if I. is the father, PW2 is the mother and ;the.'b1"'other of the deceased. The deceased was ._Vftiaj:ieri'to~f&1 about 21/2 years prior to the incident. PW1 paid 'I trholas of goid and Rs.8000/- cash as dowry at the time of i'"the" '1naI'1'*iage. it is the case of the prosecution that accused weie dissatisfied with the dowry and demand additional