Telangana High Court
K.Swarnalatha vs Vaka Srinivas Maliyadri on 31 December, 2018
HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE B.SIVA SANKARA RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.4655 of 2017
ORDER:
The petitioners are accused Nos.2 & 3 among 3 accused in SC.No.179 of 2017 pending on the file of learned XIII Additional District & Sessions Judge, LB Nagar, Ranga Reddy District. The 1st respondent is the defacto complainant. It is outcome of crime No.120 of 2013 of the defacto complainant dated 04.02.2013 to the SHO, KPHB PS, Cyberabad Commissionerate. It is after registration of the crime for the offence punishable under Section 304-B IPC against the 3 accused, the police filed final report in the form of charge sheet dated 25.02.2014 that was taken cognizance for the offence supra by the learned committal Magistrate in committing the case to the Court of Session as trialable by the Court of Session, and at the post committal stage the Sessions Division allotted the SC number and secured the presence of the accused. It is the same now seeking to quash by A.2 & A.3 no other than parents of A.1.
2. The deceased was Smt. Haritha @ Prasanna wife of A.1-Ravi Kumar and daughter in law of A.2 & A.3, the petitioners. The marriage of A.1 with the deceased was performed on 05.11.2008 at Meridian function Hall, Toli Chowki, as per Hindu law and customs. The deceased met with suspicious death on 03/04-02-2013 within 7 years of marriage. As per the defacto complainant-R2, LW.1, no other 2 Dr.SSRB,J Crl.P.No.4655 of 2017 than father of the deceased at the time of marriage as per the demand of accused 1 to 3 (husband and parents in law of the deceased), they have given Rs.10,00,000/- cash, 50 tulas gold, Rs.1,00,000/- towards adapaduchu katnam and Rs.5,00,000/- towards marriage expenses and after the marriage deceased joined her husband A.1 at Madhapur where A.1 to A.3, sister of A.1 i.e., A4 together staying who subjected the deceased to mental and physical harassment demanding additional dowry. For the onslaughts suffering by deceased to the complaints they were consoling to put up later they kept separate family at KPHB colony there also A.1 continuously harassing the deceased physically and mentally with additional dowry demand later a Panchayat was held. A.1 shifted his residence to Moulali where undertook constructions work and even there he was torturing his wife the deceased to bring money for doing business, on that defacto complainant given Rs.5,00,000/- to A1. Earlier the deceased was attending job and A1 used to spend her salary even for his own. Later A.1 shifted the residence to own premises at Addagutta scene of offence where all the accused 1 to 4 and deceased were staying. The deceased left the job and staying as house wife in the joint family where all the accused were harassing her with the demands for additional dowry even she was adjusting at the instance of the defacto complainant and family members unable to bear with on the intervening night of 03/04-02-2013 from A.1 bet the deceased 3 Dr.SSRB,J Crl.P.No.4655 of 2017 to meet the demands for additional dowry the deceased called her brother Madhu-LW.3 and informed about A.1 bet her to meet the additional demand for dowry and she could not bear the harassment and asked to bring the amount to meet. The defacto complainant's son LW.3 informed the deceased sister of him of they would come by next morning and put up with patience meantime. On 04.02.2013 at about 12 Noon defacto complainant and his son LW.3 went to the house of accused and deceased and found main door was opened and A.1 was not there and when he called his daughter-the deceased there was no response from her bedroom and it was found bolted from inside, they called the watchmen, servant and other neighbours who came there and forcibly break open the door from which the bolt of the door broke as they pushed the door and went inside in the room and found the deceased committed suicide by hanging to ceiling fan with saree and it is stated as of accused harassed the deceased mentally and physically for additional dowry she committed suicide having vexed with her life from their harassment supra. In the course of investigation from the above report LW.23-IO having registered the case entrusted the investigation to LW.24 who completed the investigation with assistance of LW.23 and filed the final report by citing 22 more witnesses including the defacto complainant his wife, 2 sons, defacto complainant's brother in law, the house maid servant of deceased, neighbour of deceased, mediators-LW.8 & 9 to the earlier 4 Dr.SSRB,J Crl.P.No.4655 of 2017 dispute raised by defacto complainant against the accused, watchman of the premises/scene of offence-LW.10, photographer of the scene-LW.11, previous neighbours of deceased at Moulali-LW.12 & 13, another watchman of the apartment where deceased and accused earlier stayed-LW.14 and previous neighbour at KPHB-LW.15 and scene observation punch witnesses and inquest witnesses-LWs.16 to 19, inquest conducted by LW.20-Tahsildar and LW.21- Doctor conducted PME and given opinion and LW.22- Scientific Officer APFSL, who examined mobile phone, laptop computer of deceased and retrieved outgoing sms and emails and furnished report to the IO dated 10.01.2014. The investigation from the above sum up in the charge sheet against the accused saying the Doctor who conducted autopsy opined of death due to Asphyxia due to hanging, the mediators also stated about the dispute raised earlier while A.1 with deceased staying at Madhapur including from the neighbours examination regarding the ill-treatment and during their stay at Moulali the neighbours and watchman of the premises spoke about the harassment and the Scientific Officer stated 12 contacts and 25 sms retrieved from Tata Docomo sim card and hard copy given and data from phone memory of it could not be retrieved being not compatible to existing software available in APFSL and coming to item No.2 laptop in working condition, there are 3 NTFS partitions with Microsoft windows of operating system along with programs 5 Dr.SSRB,J Crl.P.No.4655 of 2017 and data retrieved from unallocated clusters given in hard copy. The IO states therefrom that the investigation disclosed that after marriage of deceased with A1 while deceased was staying at the in-laws house with her husband i.e., A1 to A3 having given Rs.10,00,000/- cash, 50 tulas gold, Rs.1,00,000/- adapaduchu katnam, Rs.5,00,000/- towards expenditure at the marriage and the marriage was consummated. The sister in law of deceased i.e., A4 was also staying where the deceased was subjected to harassment physically and mentally in their hands for additional dowry and deceased informed about her plight and harassment of accused for additional dowry to her parents who were consoling and convincing to put up and later A.1 set up separate residence at KPHB where he continued the harassment of her physically and mentally to meet additional dowry demands and Panchayat was held through LW.8 & 9 who made efforts and in vain for the accused continuously torturing demanding for additional dowry and later A.1 shifted with deceased to Moulali where also he continued torture and harassment with pressure to bring additional dowry from parents of deceased for his business for which LW.1-defacto complainant given Rs.5,00,000/- to A.1 and requested not to harass the deceased. About 6 months prior to the incident A.1 shifted residence with family to Addagutta, KPHB since then all accused together even harassed to bring additional dowry, the deceased who was disclosing her plights 6 Dr.SSRB,J Crl.P.No.4655 of 2017 to her parents so to meet demands of accused and who were reconciling to put up, however there is no change in the behaviour of accused and not stopped the continuous harassment for additional dowry. It is therefrom having informed about her plights to her brother LW.3 by the deceased, from A.1 beaten her for additional dowry even which is before she committed suicide having vexed she committed suicide and there is a case against the accused Nos.1 to 3 established therefrom and there is no specific role so far as A.4 sister in law of the defacto complainant concerned in not charge sheeting A.4 and by charging A.1 to A.3 and the learned committal Magistrate therefrom taken cognizance and committed to the Court of Session which allotted SC.
3. The contentions in the quash petition against the same by impugning the allotment of SC number and committal proceedings in PRC.No.19 of 2014 by learned XIX Metropolitan Magistrate, Kukatpally, Miyapur from final report in crime No.120 of 2013 by KPHB PS is that A.2 & A.3 are parents of A.1-Senior Citizens and residents of Dwaraka Nagar Colony, Madhapur and never stayed with A.1 and deceased for deceased only stayed for 10 or 15 days after marriage in the family house and later deceased and A.1 were staying since marriage 2009 separately and there should be harassment for additional dowry since before death without which the question of applying Section 304-B does not arise 7 Dr.SSRB,J Crl.P.No.4655 of 2017 and it is lacking in the case on the facts, but for the omnibus allegations which cannot be sufficient to implicate in the grave crime without any sustainable material. A.1 sent legal notice to deceased on 22.02.2012 requesting to join him for marital life and deceased issued reply dated 12.03.2012. The deceased has committed suicide and even on 19.09.2012 she made an attempt and was recovered. A.4 is resident of USA. The police from investigation rightly deleted her name by not charging and there is no even any case against A.2 & A.3 and thereby the SC proceedings are liable to be quashed.
4. The additional material in support of the quash petition filed by accused Nos.2 & 3 which contains the statements of the witnesses during investigation and report of Truth Lab and the disputed suicide note of the deceased which according to the petitioners read as of the deceased that "naku life meeda interest ledu. Na chavuku karanam evaru kadu deeni pedda scene cheyadu please". In the truth lab it was marked as Q1 and the signature as Q2 and the report of the Truth Lab mentioned that person who wrote the standard writings marked as S1 to S27 and the signatures marked as S28 to 38 also. The other writings also send by accused.
5. Learned Public Prosecutor representing the State disputed the said incomplete suicide note without filing the earlier and subsequent pages and also in saying it is never part of the investigation material and cannot be looked into.
8 Dr.SSRB,J Crl.P.No.4655 of 2017 There is force in the submission of the learned Public Prosecutor but for if at all there is any basis to serve as defence to the accused for the reason it is not an undisputed and unimpeccable material to place reliance to the conclusion of the deceased was never harassed or never subjected to cruelty or did not commit suicide for any additional demands for dowry. The statements during investigation of the prosecution witnesses when speaks about the allegations for additional demand for dowry it is not a case to quash the proceedings but for to leave any defence of the accused left open including against the petitioners/A.2 and A.3.
6. Accordingly and with these observations, rather than dismissal, this Criminal Petition is disposed of.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
_______________________________ Dr. B. SIVA SANKARA RAO, J Date: 31.12.2018 ska