Bangalore District Court
State Of Karnataka vs Basavegowda on 1 September, 2016
IN THE COURT OF LXIX ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-70)
Present: Sri T.P.Ramalinge Gowda,
LXIX Additional City Civil and
Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
Dated this the 1st day of September, 2016
SESSIONS CASE No.196/2015
Complainant : State of Karnataka
By Banashankari P.S.
(By Learned Public Prosecutor )
-V/S-
Accused : Basavegowda,
s/o late Ramanna,
aged about 27 years
r/at No. 107,
Gurrappanamata road,
Viujayapura, Devanahalli taluk,
Bangalore Rural District.
1 Date of commission of offence 17.8.2014
2 Date of report of occurrence 17.8.2014
3 Name of first informer Munikrishnappa
4 Date of commencement of 14.1.2016
evidence
5 Date of closing of evidence 4.6.2016
2 SC No. 196/2015
6 Offence complained of U/Sec. 306 and 420
of IPC
7 Opinion of the Judge Charge not proved
: JUDGMENT :
The Police Sub Inspector of Banashankari Police Station, Bengaluru has submitted the charge-sheet, against the accused in Cr.No.211/2014, for the offences punishable under Section 306, 420 of Indian Penal Code.
2. The committal court after taking cognizance of the charge- sheet registered C.C. No. 34027/2014 on the file of III ACMM, Bengaluru, against accused and committed the case for trial under Sec. 209 of Code of Criminal Procedure, after complying the provision of Sec. 207 of Code of Criminal Procedure to the Prl. City Civil and Sessions Judge. In pursuant to the committal order, on committal of the case, present case has been registered and assigned to this court for disposal in accordance with law. While committing the case to the Sessions Court, the accused was on bail. After securing the presence of the accused and after hearing the prosecution and accused, my learned predecessor has framed the charge. The accused pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried.
3. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:- 3 SC No. 196/2015
The accused who was in love with one M.Bhagya, promised M.Bhagya to marry, but married one Shwetha the daughter of Byrappa of Chikkaballapura taluk and cheated M.Bhagya. On 15.8.2014 when M.Bhagya alongwith CW 2 to CW 8 gone to the house of accused at Vijayapura and when M.Bhagya questioned the accused about the cheating, the accused told M.Bhagya that he would not marry her and he told her to go and die and thereafter M.Bhagya by leaving death note in her dairy stating that Basavegowda abetted and instigated her to commit suicide, committed suicide on 17.8.2014 at about 11.30 p.m. in her bed room with her veil. Accordingly the father of M.Bhagya lodged first information statement against the accused for the offences punishable U/Sec. 306, 420 of IPC.
4. The Prosecution in all cited 19 witnesses, but examined only 10 witnesses as PW.1 to 10 and got marked 20 documents exhibited as Ex.P1 to P.20 and marked three material objects as Mo.1 to 3. On 22.7.2016 CW 2 was dropped by this court as he left the address and CW. 22 and 23 was given up by the prosecution and summons issued to CW 6 to 17 and 20 are not executed since 14.1.2016. On perusing the deposition of the examined witnesses, all are turned hostile. Hence the examination of CW.6 to 17 and 20 are dropped on 4.8.2016. After the evidence of prosecution taken as closed the statement of the accused was recorded U/sec. 313 of Cr.P.C. Accused denied the incriminating evidence as false and he has not chosen 4 SC No. 196/2015 to lead defence evidence. Total denial of prosecution case, is his defence.
5. This Court has heard the arguments of both sides and perused records carefully.
6. In the light of above materials and allegation of prosecution, following points arises for my consideration:-
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused who was in love with deceased M.Bhagya, cheated her by marrying Shwetha and thereby committed the offence punishable u/sec. 420 of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that deceased committed suicide on 17.8.2014 at about 11.30 p.m. in her bed room with her veil on the abetment and instigation given by the accused, thereby the accused committed an offence punishable U/Sec. 306 of IPC?
3. What order?
7. My findings to the above points are as follows:-
Point No.1 and 2:- In the negative Point No.3:- As per final order, for the following:-5 SC No. 196/2015
: R E A S O N S :
8. POINT NO.1 and 2: These points are taken up together for common discussion so as to avoid repetition of facts. The prosecution has examined 10 witnesses out of 19 witnesses. PW.1 is the father of the deceased Bhagya, he deposed that the deceased Bhagya is his 2nd daughter and on 17.8.2014 she died at the age of 26. She studied upto 7th standard and was working at Beauty parlour. He do not know why Bhagya committed suicide and he do not know the accused and he handed over the mobile phone of Bhagya to the police, but not handed over the dairy and he admits his signature on Ex.P.1. But he deposed that he do not know the contents of Ex.P.1. He also identified his signature on Ex.P.2 mahazar which is marked as Ex.P.2(a). The police visited the spot and took the dairy, mobile under the mahazar, which is marked as Ex.P.3. Ex.P.3(a) is his signature. The police sent the dead body to post mortem examination. He identified the veil which is marked as MO.1, which was used by the deceased to commit suicide and identified the writing of his daughter in the dairy which is marked as Ex.P.4 and he does not know the contents of dairy. He also identified the mobile which is marked as MO. 2 and the sim is marked as MO2(a). The witness turned hostile, not supported the case of the prosecution. In the cross examination also he has not supported the case of the prosecution. In his cross examination 6 SC No. 196/2015 he denied the suggestion that `her daughter was in love affair with the accused and on the assurance of marriage the accused has developed physical contact with her daughter and subsequently married with one Shwetha and on questioning the same he told her daughter to go and die and as such he has instigated her to commit suicide`, as false. Further denied the suggestion that about which her daughter wrote a suicide note in the dairy stating that the accused is responsible for her death committed suicide, and then he has given the complaint as per Ex.P.1 and all other suggestions were denied by him.
9. PW. 2 is the mother, PW. 3 is the sister of the deceased and PW. 4 is the husband of PW.3, PW. 5 and 9 are the brothers of deceased. They deposed that they do not know the accused, Bhagya committed suicide about one and a half years back, they do not know the reason for suicide and they have not given any statement before the police, they identified the veil of the deceased which is marked as MO.1. The witnesses turned hostile, not supported the case of the prosecution. In the cross examination also they have not supported the case of the prosecution. In the cross examination their statement is marked as Ex.P.
10. PW. 6 Dr. Ramesh, Assistant Professor of KIMS Hospital has deposed that on 18.8.2014 he examined the dead body of Bhagya and conducted postmortem examination and found that the dead body of female aged about 26years, 7 SC No. 196/2015 measuring 155 CM length. Moderately built and nourished. Brown in complexion. Rigor mortis present all over the body. Post mortem staining present over back of the body. Face is congested. Lips and nail beds are bluish in colour.
Ligature Mark- An oblique ligature mark present over front and upper part of neck, above the level of thyroid cartilage. It runs upwards, outwards and backwards measuring 20X2cm. It is situated 3cm from right ear lobule, 2cm below left ear lobule, 5cm below the chin and it is discontinuous over back of neck for 14cm. The ligature mark is hard and parchmentised.
On dissection of neck the tissues immediately beneath the ligature mark are pale, white and glistening. The tissues above and below the ligature mark are congested. The hyoid bone and thyroid cartilage are intact.
On opening scalp, scalp bone is intact, Skull is also intact. The meaninges are congested. Brain congested on cut section of the brain petechial haemorrhages in the white matter present.
In thorax chest wall and ribs and cartilages are intact, pleurae was intact. Larynx and Trachea was intact and Lungs intact and congested on cut section exudes dark colour fluid blood. In Pericardium Heard and large vessels was intact and congested.
In abdomen walls, peritoneum, mouth pharynx and esophagus are intact. On opening the stomach it contains partially digested sooji meal, 3/4th of stomach and smell and mucosa -nad are nothing abnormal detective. Intestines and its 8 SC No. 196/2015 contains gas and its contents. Liver and spleen are intact and congested. Kidnyes intact and congested. Bladder is empty and in genital organs, Hymen Ruptured, old tears present. Uterus normal contains 5ml of menstrual blood.
The ligature mark was ante mortem in nature.
After conducting the post mortem I am of the opinion that DEATH is due to as PHYXIA as result of HANGING The ligature material is a yellow and brown coloured cotton veil in one piece. On twisting, the ligature material corresponds to the ligature mark and can withstand the weight of the body. After examination the ligature material was handed over to the concerned police in an unsealed manner.
He further deposed that he issued postmortem examination report as per Ex.P.10, Ex.P.10(a) is his signature. He identified the veil which is marked as MO.1. PW. 6 has not been cross examined by the defence counsel.
11. PW. 7 P.S.Kosti, the retired ASI has deposed that on 24.8.2014 he alongwith CW 22 and 23 caught hold the accused at Vijayapura at his residence and produced him before CW. 25 and submitted the report as per Ex.P.11, Ex.P.11 (a) is his signature. He identified the accused before the court.
12. PW. 8 the PSI of Banashankari P.S. has deposed that on 17.8.2014 at about 3.00 p.m. received the complaint from CW.1 and registered the same in UDR No. 24/2014 and the 9 SC No. 196/2015 complaint is marked as Ex.P.12. On 18.8.2014 at about 9.00 a.m. CW.1 produced one dairy containing death note, mobile of the deceased and CW.1 filed a written complaint against the accused, accordingly the said complaint was received and registered in Crime No. 211/2014 for the offence u/sec. 420, 306 of IPC and sent the FIR to the court. The said FIR is marked as Ex.P.13. The complaint is marked as Ex.P.1. The said dairy and the mobile were seized under mahazar Ex.P.3 in the presence of CW. 11 and 12 . The witness further deposed that the mobile and the sim card are marked as MO.2 and MO.2(a). He further deposed that on the same day he conducted inquest panchanama in the presence of CW 16,17 and 18 which is marked as Ex.P.15. Thereafter send the requisition to CW. 19 for conducting postmortem examination. He further deposed that he seized the veil of the deceased which is marked as MO.1 and after postmortem examination he handed over the dead body to the relatives of deceased and on the same day visited the spot and conducted spot mahazar as per Ex.P.2 and prepared the rough sketch of the spot as per Ex.P.5. He further deposed that on 18.8.2014 recorded the statements of CW 9 to 11 and on 19.8.2014 recorded the statements of CW 6 to 8. PW 2 to 5 gave their statements as per Ex.P.6 to 9. He further deposed that on 24.8.2014 CW 22 and 23 produced the accused before him and accordingly he took the accused to the custody and recorded his voluntary statement which is marked as Ex.P.17. He further deposed that the accused produced his mobile phone and the 10 SC No. 196/2015 same was seized in the presence of CW. 13 and 14 under the mahazar Ex.P.18. The said mobile is marked as MO.3. He further deposed that on 19.9.2014 he received the Wedding Invitation Card of the marriage of accused and Swetha which is marked as Ex.P.19 and on 11.9.2014 received the PM report from KIMS hospital as per Ex.P.10 and on 28.9.2014 received the Discharge Summary from Agrasena Hospital which is marked as Ex.P.22 and after completion of the investigation, on 25.9.2014 filed the charge sheet against the accused.
13. PW. 10 is the witness to the inquest mahazar Ex.P.15. The witness identified her signatures which are marked as Ex.P.14(b) the notice issued by IO and Ex.P.15(b), but she deposed that she do not know the contents of Ex.P.14 and 15 and the police have not obtained statement from her. In her cross examination she denied the entire suggestions put by the prosecution. Nothing is elicited from her evidence.
14. From the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution it is not in dispute that the deceased has committed the suicide. The unchallenged evidence of PW.6 Doctor who conducted PM on the dead body of the deceased opined that the death is due to asphyxia as a result of hanging. This part of evidence is supported by the PM report marked as Ex.P.10 coupled with the oral evidence of PW.1 to 5 and 9. 11 SC No. 196/2015
15. Then the prosecution has to prove who has abetted the deceased for committing the suicide by hanging. Regarding the abetment for committing suicide none of the prosecution witnesses have deposed anything. PW.1 to 5 and 9 who are the parents and relatives of the deceased have turned hostile and have not deposed anything regarding abetment by the accused. Further all these witnesses deposed that they do not know the accused and they certainly denied the relationship between the deceased and the accused. Hence the prosecution is failed to establish the fact that the deceased committed suicide on the abetment of the accused. Further from the oral evidence of IO and Ex.P.19 and 20 coupled with the answer given by the accused during his statement u/sec. 313 of Cr.P.C. clearly establish that the accused has got married with one Shwetha. But the prosecution utterly failed to establish that due to that marriage the deceased was cheated by the accused and also accused abetted the deceased for committing suicide by saying that he will not marry her and she may go and die. Even regarding the marriage of accused with Swhetha is not deposed by PW. 1 to 5 and 9. The said fact is established only through the evidence of official witnesses and Ex.P. 19 and 20 the Wedding Invitation Card and the photograph. Without establishing the fact that the accused and deceased were in love affair and the accused cheated her by marrying Swetha, this court cannot found that the accused committed the offence of abetment and cheating. For the want of corroborative and satisfactory evidence, serious 12 SC No. 196/2015 doubt arises in the mind of the court and the benefit of doubt is to be given to the accused. Hence, the accused is entitled for that benefit and the acquittal. Accordingly these points are answered in negative.
16. POINT NO.2:- In the light of finding on above point, this court proceeds to pass the following:-
O R D E R In exercise of power vested with this court U/Sec.235(1) of Criminal Procedure Code, it is ordered that accused is acquitted for the offences punishable U/Sec. 306, 420 of Indian Penal Code.
Accused is set at free for the said offence. Bail bond and surety bond stands cancelled. M.O.2, MO.2(a) and 3 mobiles are ordered to be confiscated to the State and MO.1 is ordered to destroyed after the appeal period is over. (Dictated to the J.W. on computer, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 1st day of September, 2016.) (T.P.Ramalinge Gowda) LXIX Addl.C.C. & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR PROSECUTION: 13 SC No. 196/2015
PW 1 Munikrishna
PW 2 Hanumakka
PW 3 Manjula
PW 4 Radhakrishna
PW 5 Navina
PW 6 Dr.C.Ramesh
PW 7 P.S.Kosty
PW 8 Manju
PW 9 Ananada
PW 10 Manjula
LIST OF DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED FOR PROSECUTION:
Ex.P.1 Complaint
Ex.P.2. Mahazar
Ex.P.3 Mahazar
Ex.P.4 Dairy
Ex.P.5 Rough Sketch
Ex.P.6 Statement of PW.2
Ex.P.7 Statement of PW.3
Ex.P.8 Statement of PW.4
Ex.P.9 Statement of PW.5
Ex.P.10 PM report
Ex.P.11 Report
Ex.P.12 UDR
Ex.P.13 FIR
Ex.P.14 mahazar
Ex.P.15 Inquest report
Ex.P.16 Report of PW. 8
Ex.P.17 Voluntary statement of accused
Ex.P.18 Spot mahazar
Ex.P.19 Wedding card
Ex.P.20 Photo
Ex.P.21 Requisition letter
Ex.P.22 Discharge summary
Ex.P.23 Statement of witness
LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR PROSECUTION: 14 SC No. 196/2015
MO.1 veil
MO.2 one mobile
MO.2(a) sim card
MO.3 one LG mobile
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED & DOCUMENTS
EXHIBITED FOR ACCUSED : Nil
(T.P.Ramalinge Gowda)
LXIX Addl.C.C. & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
15 SC No. 196/2015
Dt: 1.9.2016
Judgment pronounced in open court
vide separate order.
O R D E R
In exercise of power vested with this court U/Sec.235(1) of Criminal Procedure Code, it is ordered that accused is acquitted for the offences punishable U/Sec. 306, 420 of Indian Penal Code.
Accused is set at free for the said offence. Bail bond and surety bond stands cancelled. M.O.2, MO.2(a) and 3 mobiles are ordered to be confiscated to the State and MO.1 is ordered to destroyed after the appeal period is over.
LXIX Addl.C.C. & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.16 SC No. 196/2015