Bangalore District Court
The State Rep. By vs A-1 Parthiban Jayalakshmi on 4 September, 2019
IN THE COURT OF VI ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
PRESENT : KRISHNAMURTHY R. PADASALGI
B.Sc., LL.M.,HDSE
VI ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU.
Dated this the 4th day of September 2019
C.C.No.28180-2014
Complainant : The State rep. by
PI of Halasuru Gate Woman PS
Bengaluru.
Vs
Accused : A-1 Parthiban Jayalakshmi
Varadarajan
S/o Varadarajan Mudaliar
Aged about 32 Yrs
A-2 Varadarajan Mudaliar
S/o Late Guruswamy
Aged about 65 Yrs
A-3 Smt. Jayalakshmi
W/o Varadarajan Mudaliar
Aged about 61 Yrs
R/at No.7/72B, L.S.Puram,
Gowdar Street, Mettupalyam,
Tamil Nadu.
Date of offence : Subsequent to 20-6-2011
2 CC.No.28180-2014
Offence : U/s.498(A), 506 r/w 34 of IPC
and Sec.3 and 4 of DP Act
Plea : Accused pleaded not guilty
Final order : Accused Nos.1 to 3 are
acquitted
Date of Order : 4-9-2019.
** ** **
JUDGMENT
The Police Inspector of Halasuru Gate Woman Police Station has presented this charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable U/s.498(A) 506 of IPC and Sec. 3 and 4 of D.P.Act.
2. It is the case of prosecution that on 20-6-2011 the marriage of complainant and accused No.1 was solemnized in A.S.R. Convention Hall, Banasawadi and on the demanded of accused Nos.1 to 3 110 grams gold ornaments, 3 Kg silver and Rs.60,000-00 was given as dowry. The accused and complainant lived happily for short time. Later on the accused started to ill-treat her to bring 3 CC.No.28180-2014 more dowry and when complainant was in Ireland by knowing that she is pregnant the accused told that child is not required and asked to come only back home if she brigs additional dowry. Based upon this incident this instant complaint is registered. After due investigation instant charge sheet is filed.
3. After registering the case and taking the cognizance, process was issued against the accused. Accused appeared and enlarged on bail. Papers of prosecution furnished to the accused.
4. Charges framed and explained to accused. They claimed to be tried.
5. Prosecution examined one witness as PW-1 and got marked Ex.P-1 to 6. In the cross examination of PW-1 Ex.D-1 to Ex.D-5 got marked.
4 CC.No.28180-2014
6. Since there is no incriminating evidence against the accused, statement U/s.313 of Cr.P.C is dispensed with.
7. Heard the arguments of learned Sr.APP and learned counsel for the accused.
8. The points that arise for consideration are as follows:-
1) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that at the time of marriage of complainant with accused on 20-6-2011 110 grams gold ornaments, 3 Kg silver and Rs.60,000-00 as dowry and after the marriage demanded additional dowry and committed offence punishable U/s.3 and 4 of D.P.Act?
2) Whether the prosecution further proves beyond reasonable doubt that after the marriage the accused with common intention ill-treated the complainant and committed offence punishable U/s.498(A) r/w 34 of IPC?
5 CC.No.28180-2014
3) Whether the prosecution further proves beyond reasonable doubt that at said date time and place accused with common intention gave threat to the life of CW-1 and committed offence punishable U/s.506 r/w 34 of IPC?
4) What Order?
9. Findings on the above points are as follows:-
Point Nos.1 to 3 : In the Negative Point No.3 : As per final Order for the following:-
REASONS
10. Point Nos.1 to 3 :- Complainant is examined as PW-1. She has supported the prosecution. In the cross- examination on 21-8-2019 she admits that the divorce petition was filed bearing No.3273/2016 and it was sent for mediation and in the mediation matter is compromised and ended in divorce. She further admits that she has received DD of Rs.10 lakhs before Family Court and she also 6 CC.No.28180-2014 received Rs.10 lakhs DD on 21-8-2019 before this court in pursuance of terms of settlement. She also admits that she is withdrawing allegations in view of the settlement.
11. Having regard to her evidence and considering the fact that matrimonial matter is settled between the parties and due performance of agreement has taken place, this matter is also required to be ended in acquittal. As there were no incriminating evidence, statement U/s.313 of Cr.P.C against the accused was dispensed with. Accordingly point Nos.1 to 3 are answered in the Negative.
12. Point No.4: In view of the finding on above points, following order is passed:-
ORDER Acting U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C accused Nos.1 to 3 by name Parthiban Jayalakshmi Varadarajan, Varadarajan and Smt. Jayalakshmi are hereby 7 CC.No.28180-2014 acquitted for the offences punishable U/s.498(A), 506 r/w 34 of IPC and Sec.3 and 4 of DP Act.
Their bail bond and surety bonds stands cancelled after period of six months from today in view of section 437A of Cr.P.C. (Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed thereof, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court this the 4th day of September 2019).
(KRISHNAMURTHY R. PADASALGI) VI Addl.C.M.M. Bengaluru city. Annexure
1. Witnesses examined for the prosecution:
CW-1 PW-1 Smt. Priya Mahalingam.
2.Documents marked on behalf of the prosecution:
Ex.P-1 Complaint Ex.P-2 Mahazar
Ex.P-3 to 6 Wedding card and photos. 8 CC.No.28180-2014
3. Material objects:
Nil.
4.Documents marked on behalf of the defence:
Ex.D-1 Certified copy of Vakalath in HMOP No.30/2013 Ex.D-2 Certified copy of application with Affidavit Ex.D-3 Certified copy of Petition with affidavit Ex.D-4 Certified copy of Petition with affidavit Ex.D-5 Certified copy of the petition.
VI ACMM., Bengaluru.9 CC.No.28180-2014
ORDER Acting U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C accused Nos.1 to 3 by name Parthiban Jayalakshmi Varadarajan, Varadarajan and Smt. Jayalakshmi are hereby acquitted for the offences punishable U/s.498(A), 506 r/w 34 of IPC and Sec.3 and 4 of DP Act. Their bail bond and surety bonds stands cancelled after period of six months from today in view of section 437A of Cr.P.C.
(Vide Separate Order) VI ACMM., Bengaluru.10 CC.No.28180-2014
11 CC.No.28180-2014 12 CC.No.28180-2014