Bangalore District Court
The State Of Karnataka Through vs Srinivasalu on 17 February, 2021
1 CC.No.20790/16
IN THE COURT OF XXIV ADDL. CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021
C.C. No.20790/16
Present: SRI. BALAGOPALAKRISHNA.
XXIV ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU.
COMPLAINANT : The State of Karnataka through
Yeshwanthapura Police Station
V/s.
Accused 1. Srinivasalu, s/o.Ramanjaneyalu,
R/at.No.78/G, New Railway
quarters, Yeshwanthapura,
Bangalore.
2. Ramalingamma,
w/o.Ramanjaneyalu,
R/at.No.78/G, New Railway
quarters, Yeshwanthapura,
Bangalore.
3. Saraswathi, R/at.No.78/G, New
Railway quarters, Yeshwanthapura,
Bangalore.
2 CC.No.20790/16
DATE OF COMMENCEMENT : 26/06/13 onwards
OF OFFENCE
DATE OF ARREST OF THE : Accused No.1 to 3 are on bail.
ACCUSED
OFFENCES ALLEGED : U/s.498A r/w.34 of IPC and
Sec.3 and 4 of D.P.Act
DATE OF COMMENCEMENT : 17/02/2021
OF EVIDENCE
DATE OF CLOSING OF : 17/02/2021
EVIDENCE
OPINION OF THE JUDGE : Found not guilty
(Balagopalakrishna.)
XXIV A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.
: J U D G M E N T :
The PI of Yeshwanthapura Police Station has filed
charge sheet against accused for the offences punishable
U/s.498A r/w.34 of IPC and sec.3 and 4 of D.P.Act.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as under:
It is the case of the prosecution that, the marriage between
CW 1 and accused No.1 was performed as per the customs and
rituals prevailing in Hindu Community on 26/6/13. Accused
No.2 is the mother in law and accused No.3 is the sister in law of
the CW 1. It is further alleged that at the time of marriage, the
3 CC.No.20790/16
family of the CW 1 were given gold ornaments, cash and also
performed the marriage luxuriously by spending Rs.5 lakhs.
Soon after the marriage the CW.1 has started to live in the house
of accused at house No.78/G, New Railway quarters,
Yeshwanthapura, Bangalore, at that time, the accused No.1 and
2 were looked after the CW 1 very well and then all the accused
persons joining together and having common intention and in
furtherance of the same, raised quarrel with CW1and demanded
her to bring additional dowry and in this regard, they have given
physical and mental agony to her. Particularly on 25/2/16
accused No.1 to 3 raised quarrel with CW 1, abused her in a
filthy word and assaulted with hands on her body and thrown
out the CW 1, not to come inside their house till she bring
additional dowry and thereby accused has committed the
offences punishable U/s. 498A r/w.34 of IPC and Sec.3 and 4 of
DP Act.
3. In pursuance of the complaint given by the complainant
by name Smt.Ganashree, the police have registered crime in
Cr.No.190/16. After conclusion of the investigation the
Investigating Officer has filed charge sheet against the accused
No.1 to 3.
4. This court has taken cognizance for the offences
punishable U/s.498A r/w.34 of IPC and Sec.3 and 4 of DP
4 CC.No.20790/16
Act and issued summons to the accused No.1 to 3. Accused
No.1 to 3 are on bail.
5. The copy of the charge sheet and other material
documents has been supplied to the accused No.1 to 3 as
required U/s. 207 of Cr.P.C.
6. Heard before framing charge and charges were framed
for the offences punishable U/s.498A r/w.34 of IPC and Sec.3
and 4 of DP Act and read and explained to the accused in the
language known to them. Accused No.1 to 3 pleaded not guilty
and claimed for trial.
7. In order to prove the case of the prosecution out of the
charge sheeted witnesses has got examined PW.1 and got marked
Ex.P.1 and Ex.P.2. Since the material witness has turned hostile
to the case of the prosecution evidence of rest of the witnesses
have been dropped.
8. There is no incriminating evidence against the
accused No.1 to 3. Hence statement as required U/s.313 of
Cr.P.C. is dispensed with. No defense evidence on the side of the
accused.
9. Heard the arguments of learned Sr. A.P.P. and learned
defense counsel.
10. The following point would arise for my consideration:
5 CC.No.20790/16
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond
reasonable doubt that, the marriage between
CW 1 and accused No.1 was performed as
per the customs and rituals prevailing in
Hindu Community on 26/6/13. Accused
No.2 is the mother in law and accused No.3
is the sister in law of the CW 1, at the time
of marriage, the family of the CW 1 were
given gold ornaments, cash and also
performed the marriage luxuriously by
spending Rs.5 lakhs. Soon after the
marriage the CW.1 has started to live in the
house of accused at house No.78/G, New
Railway quarters, Yeshwanthapura,
Bangalore, at that time, the accused No.1
and 2 were looked after the CW 1 very well
and then all the accused persons joining
together and having common intention and
in furtherance of the same, raised quarrel
with CW1and demanded her to bring
additional dowry and in this regard, they
have given physical and mental agony to her.
Particularly on 25/2/16 accused No.1 to 3
raised quarrel with CW 1, abused her in a
filthy word and assaulted with hands on her
body and thrown out the CW 1, not to come
inside their house till she bring additional
dowry and thereby accused has committed
the offences punishable U/s. 498A r/w.34 of
IPC and Sec.3 and 4 of DP Act ?
2. What order ?
11. On the basis of the evidence available on record my
6 CC.No.20790/16
answer to the above points are as under;
Point No.1 - In the Negative.
Point No.2 _ As per final order for the following;
REASONS
12. POINT NO.1:
PW1 being the complainant and material witness has
turned hostile. The learned APP cross examined her at length
and suggested the case of the prosecution but she denied all the
suggestions. She denied that, she has given complaint before the
police as per Ex.P.1. She denied the contents of the complaint -
Ex.P.1. She denied that, accused have demanded the dowry,
accepted the dowry and illtreated her on account of dowry. She
denied the contents of the complaint - Ex.P.1. So nothing is
elicited by learned Sr. A.P.P. through the cross of the PW.1 to
prove her case. PW.1 during her cross specifically admitted that,
she has entered compromise with the accused. The learned APP
cross examined her at length and suggested that, accused has
demanded the dowry, accepted the dowry and illtreated
complainant due to dowry but she denied all the suggestions.
PW.1 is the material witness but she has turned hostile, and also
admitted that, now she has entered compromise with the
accused. So it appears that, now complainant and accused have
compromised the dispute.
13. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Crl.Appeal.No.2123/14
7 CC.No.20790/16
arising out of SLP(Crl) No.7451 of 2012 dated 23/09/2014
between Murarilal Gupta and Another Vs. State of UP and
others. specifically held as under;
"Offence U/s. 498(A) IPC and dowry prohibition act
could be compounded where parties are compounding
matrimonial dispute though both the offences are not
compoundable."
So looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and
by applying above said ruling I hold that, the evidence of
complainant is not sufficient to prove the guilt against the
accused.
14. It is well settled position of law that, prosecution has to
prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt but the prosecution
has not at all proved its case through the evidence of PW.1. It is
also well settled position of law that if there exists any reasonable
doubt in the case of the prosecution the benefit of the doubt may
be given to the accused. In this case there is no evidence against
the accused. Hence I hold that, prosecution has not proved its
case beyond all reasonable doubt and it is fit case to extend
benefit of the doubt to the accused. Accordingly point under
reference answered in the Negative.
15. POINT NO.2:
For the aforesaid reason and discussion I proceed to pass
8 CC.No.20790/16
the following:
ORDER
Acting U/s. 248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused No.1 to 3 are hereby acquitted for the offences punishable U/s. 498A r/w.34 of IPC and Sec.3 and 4 of DP Act. They are set at liberty.
The bail bonds and surety bonds executed by the accused No.1 to 3 are hereby stands cancelled. However accused No.1 to 3 shall execute Personal Bond of Rs.50,000/ each by undertaking to appear before the Appellate Court, if any appeal is filed.
It is not a fit case to award victim compensation as provided U/Sec.357(1) of Cr.P.C.
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer, corrected directly on computer and then pronounced by me in open court on this the 17th day of February 2021) (Balagopalakrishna) XXIV A.C.M.M., BANGALORE.
9 CC.No.20790/16ANNEXURE Witnesses examined for the Prosecution:
PW1 : Ganashree Documents marked for the Prosecution:
Ex.P1 : Complaint Ex.P1(a) : Signature of PW.1 Ex.P.2 : Spot mahazar
Witnesses examined for the accused:
NIL Documents marked for the accused:
NIL (Balagopalakrishna) XXIV A.C.M.M., BANGALORE.