Bangalore District Court
(By The Learned Public Prosecutor) vs Has Started To Harass The Deceased ... on 20 March, 2020
IN THE COURT OF XLV ADDL. CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-46)
DATED THIS THE 20th DAY OF MARCH, 2020
PRESENT:
Sri E. RAJEEVA GOWDA, L.L.M.
XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
S.C. No.32/2017
BETWEEN
State by Viveknagar PS.,
Bengaluru .. COMPLAINANT
(By the learned Public Prosecutor)
AND
Marappa
s/o Anjinappa, a/a 27 years,
R/o Makipalli village,
Kotturu Panchayati,
Kalyanadurga Mandal, Anantapura,
Andhra Pradesh .. ACCUSED
(By Sri RM, Advocate)
*****
JUDGMENT
The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Halasurgate Sub-Division, Bangalore City, has submitted charge sheet against the accused for an offences punishable 2 S.C.No.32/2017 U/s.498A and 304-B of Indian Penal Code and Sec.3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act in Crime No.343/2011 of Vivek Nagar P.S.
2. The brief story of the prosecution are as under:
The marriage of the deceased-Smt.Bharati with the accused was performed on 16.08.2009. At the time of marriage accused and deceased has been given gold ornaments from the deceased family. After the marriage they were residing at the accused native place at Makipalli village, Kotturu Panchayati, Kalyanadurga Mandal, Anantapura, Andhra Pradesh. At that time the accused has started to harass the deceased physically and mentally, as she failed to bring any dowry, and demanded to get one acre of land from her parental house, and abetted her to die so that he can marry other, and he will get sufficient dowry, picked up quarrel, and assaulted the deceased with hands, abused, and harassed the deceased physically mentally, Further came to Bangalore for work and 3 S.C.No.32/2017 started to reside in temporary shed, near graveyard situated near Tibetian Hostel,Srinivagilu Grama, ST Bed, Koramangala within the limits of Viveknagar Police Station, Bangalore, and later the accused has continued the above version with the deceased. Due to which the deceased become anguish and on 25.12.2011 at about 7.00 p.m set her ablaze by pouring kerosene and committed suicide and died on 28.12.2011 at Victoria Hospital, and succumbed to death, due to failure of treatment, and thereby the accused has committed the offences as alleged against him.
3. The concerned police have submitted charge sheet before the jurisdictional X Addl., CMM., Bangalore. The learned Magistrate has took cognizance of the offences and committed the case to the Sessions Court by complying Sec.207 of Cr.P.C. after furnishing charge sheet copies to the accused persons. The same was numbered as SC No.32/2017.
4 S.C.No.32/2017
4. The charge was framed against the accused for the offences as alleged against him. The accused has pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried.
5.The prosecution has examined nine witnesses as PW.1 to PW.9 and got marked documents at Ex.P1 to P17 and MO1. On consent of accused counsel the inquest mahazar is marked at Ex.P7. The learned public prosecutor has gave up the witnesses CW.8, CW.9, CW.12 and CW.14 and also the learned public prosecutor has gave up CW16, CW17, CW19 and CW21 in view of the evidence of witnesses PW7 and PW8, Police Officials. CW7 is reported as dead. The concerned police failed to execute warrant against witness CW.5, CW10 and CW11 and to keep him present before the Court for the purpose of evidence in spite of issuance of NBW and proclamation, and as such the prayer of learned PP was rejected and prosecution side evidence was taken as closed with liberty to examine 5 S.C.No.32/2017 the said witness CW.5, CW10 and CW11, if the concerned police keep them present before the Court, before conclusion of trial.
6.After completion of prosecution side evidence, this Court has recorded the statement of accused, as provided U/s.313 of Cr.P.C. The accused has denied incriminating evidence present against him, and not chosen to lead defense evidence nor submitted anything to Court. The accused has complied Sec.437- A.
7.Heard the arguments on both sides and perused the materials on record.
8.The following points that arises for consideration of this court:
1. Whether the prosecution proves that the accused being husband of the deceased-Smt.Bharati at the time of marriage demanded and received gold ornaments as dowry and thereby the 6 S.C.No.32/2017 accused has committed the offence punishable u/s.3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act?
2. Whether the prosecution proves that the accused being husband of the deceased-Smt.Bharati has demanded her to bring further dowry of one acre of land and thereby the accused has committed the offence punishable u/s.3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act?
3. Whether the prosecution proves that the accused being husband of deceased-Smt.Bharati, subjected her to physical and mental cruelty and harassment demanding her to bring further dowry of one acre of land when the deceased was residing along with him and thereby the accused has committed the offence punishable u/s.498-A of IPC?
4. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the deceased-
Smt.Bharati without bearing with the ill- 7 S.C.No.32/2017
treatment and harassment by the
accused on 25.12.2011 at about
7.00p.m has set her ablaze and and succumbed to death on 28.12.2011 at 4.30 p.m. due to failure of treatment, hence, the deceased died within 7 years from the date of her marriage due to physical and mental cruelty and ill-
treatment by the accused and thereby the accused has committed the offence punishable u/s 304-B of IPC?
5. What order?
9. This Court has answered the above above points are as under:
Point No.1: In the Negative
Point No.2: In the Negative
Point No.3: In the Negative
Point No.4: In the Negative
Point No.5: As per final order
for the following:
8 S.C.No.32/2017
REASONS
10. Points No.1 to 4: These points are taken up together as they are related to each other and to avoid repetition in the discussion.
To prove the said allegation prosecution has examined nine witnesses. Among the witnesses examined by the prosecution, the complainant/PW1- mother-Smt.Sanjeevammma i.e., mother, PW2- Mr.Sanjeevappa is the father of the deceased, PW3- Kenchappa is the uncle of the deceased and PW4- Mr.Hanumantha Raydu and PW9-Mr.Nagabhushan were the native persons of accused village have given evidence as both the accused and deceased were leading happy marital life and the accused has never demanded for further dowry and the cause of the death is accidental and not purposeful act of accused. The said witnesses PW.1 to PW.4 and PW.9 did not spoken anything and for what reason deceased-Smt.Bharathi has committed suicide. The said witnesses also never 9 S.C.No.32/2017 spoken anything about physical and mental harassment given by the accused. Though the said witness PW.1 has identified the complainant and mahazar marked at Ex.P1 and Ex.P2, but she has never supported the recitals of the complaint and mahazar. Since none of the family members and relatives of the deceased supported the case of the prosecution, hence, the learned public prosecutor treated them as hostile, and cross-examined. But not able to get any useful evidence to believe the story of the prosecution. So, the evidence given by PW.1 to PW.4 and PW.9 not at all helpful to the prosecution in any angle.
10.The FSL Officer PW.5 being the Scientific Office has deposed about examination of the properties seized and subjected in PF No.343/2011 on the request of Viveknagar Police, and after examination he has given opinion that the liquid containing in the said plastic bottle is kerosene and issued report as per Ex.P8. PW.6 Dr. Dileepkumar is the Medical Officer, who has 10 S.C.No.32/2017 conducted the postmortem on the dead body of deceased-Smt.Bharathi and issued Postmortem as per Ex.P10. The learned accused counsel has completely denied the evidence given by PW.5 and PW.6.
11.Among two police official witnesses examined by the prosecution, the evidence of PW.7 Nayaz Ahmed Police Inspector discloses that on 29.12.2011 at 4.00 p.m. complainant appeared before him and lodged Ex.P1 complaint, and on the basis of Ex.P1 complaint lodged by the complainant, he registered crime No.343/2011, and after registration of case sent FIR to the Court and to his higher officers. Before registration of case, CW.17 has registered UDR FIR on the basis of death memo, which are marked as Ex.P12 and P13. After registration of FIR, he request the Special Tahsildar to conduct inquest mahazar, He has visited the spot along with CW.1 and conducted Ex.P2 spot mahazar in the presence of panchas CW.10 and CW.11 and seized 11 S.C.No.32/2017 the liter empty bottle of containing kerosence smell, , recorded statements of panchas, and brought the said bottle in to PF No.168/2011, and submitted to the Court and handed over further investigation CW.19 Police Inspector. The evidence of PW.8 Vijaya Hadagalai, Police Inspector discloses that on 12.11.2013 he took up further investigation from CW.19, recorded statements of cW.3 and 4, as per Ex.P5 and P6, and sent MO1 bottle to the FSL and received FSL report which were already marked at Ex.P8 and P9, and further received PM report of deceased marked as per Ex.P10 and brought the the same into record. Receied the Ex.P16 report submitted by CW.16. He deputed ASI Lakshmana Rddy and Vijayakumar to trace the accused, as they failed to trace the accused and submitted report along with the statements of CW.5 and 6, who are the natives of accused village, in the said statements discloses that the accused was always quarreling with his wife. He handed over further 12 S.C.No.32/2017 investigation to CW.21, and CW.21 has submitted absconding charge sheet. The learned accused counsel has denied the evidence given by both the police officials PW.7 and PW.8. Such being the case, it is an admitted fact that accused and deceased are legally wedded wife and husband. To believe the harassment has given by the accused continuously soon before the death of the deceased, there is no specific evidence placed by the prosecution. It is no doubt the inquest mahazar and Postmortem report have been marked at Ex.P7 and Ex.P10. But the prosecution has failed to place reliable evidence to consider due to physical and mental harassment of accused, the deceased has committed suicide and due to such harassment of accused, the deceased has been suffered till the time of committing suicide. Since the prosecution has failed to establish its case against accused beyond all reasonable doubt, hence, this court has answered the points No.1 to 4 in the Negative.
13 S.C.No.32/2017
12. Point No.5: In view of answer of this court on points No.1 to 4, this court proceed to pass the following:
ORDER U/s.235(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused is hereby acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 304-B of Indian Penal Code and Sec.3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
The bail bond and surety bond of accused stand canceled.
The M.O.1 being worthless is ordered to be destroyed after expiry of appeal time. (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcript corrected by me and then pronounced in open Court on this the 20th day of March , 2020) (E. RAJEEVA GOWDA) XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.14 S.C.No.32/2017
ANNEXURE List of Witnesses examined on behalf of Prosecution:
P.W.1: Smt. Sanjeevamma P.W.2: Sanjeevappa P.W.3: Kenchappa P.W.4: Hanumantha Rayadu P.W.5: C. Manjappa PW.6: Dr.Dileep Kumar.K.B., P.W.7: Nayaz Ahmed P.W.8: Vijaya Hadagali PW.9: Nagabhushan. List of Documents exhibited on behalf of Prosecution: Ex.P.1: Complaint Ex.P.2: Spot Mahazar Ex.P.3: Statement of P.W.1 Ex.P.4: Statement of PW.2 Ex.P.5: Statement of PW.3 Ex.P.6: Statement of PW.4 Ex.P.7: Inquest Mahazar Ex.P.8: FSL report Ex.P.9: Sample Seal Ex.P.10: Postmortem Report
Ex.P.11: FIR No.343/2011 dated 29.12.2011 15 S.C.No.32/2017 Ex.P.12: MLC Death Memo Ex.P.13: UDR No.53/2011 dated 28.12.2011 Ex.P.14: Letter dated 29.12.2011 Ex.P.15: PF No.168/2011 dated 29.12.2011 Ex.P.16: Statement of PC 6518 Ex.P.17: Statement of PW.9.
Ex.P.10: Report.
List of Witnesses examined on behalf of Accused:
NIL List of Documents exhibited on behalf of Accused:
NIL List of Material Objects marked on behalf of Prosecution:
M.O.1: Partly brunt plastic bottle.
(E. RAJEEVA GOWDA) XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru 16 S.C.No.32/2017 Order pronounced in the open Court vide its separate order ORDER Under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused is hereby acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 304-B of Indian Penal Code and Sec.3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
The bail bond and surety bond of accused stand canceled.
The M.O.1 being worthless is ordered to be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.
(E. RAJEEVA GOWDA) XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru