Karnataka High Court
Sri Kamaruddin Dastagir Sanadi vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 December, 2008
Author: N.Ananda
Bench: N.Ananda
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD '
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF pEcEMBE1é'I:3é0é% 4- _ _: "
BEFORE N
THE HON'BLE MR.JU*$'l'ICE Ar§';ANAb:V§'A '
CRIMINAL REVESION PE'FF¥' iON No'; :21' 15~";2Gaé'"
BETWEEN:
S11.
Age: 26 Vy¢_§av1S~,. Qcci; :Pric«'ate*,_ Ssnrige, V
R/0 TaEag111i,3.{m: _
E}ist:KoE_1apur--. V j PETTETONER
(By Sri. B-. Adv. )
,_ 'V of Kmnamig-'a.,
'F%utx11gi1V4P€,-'éhlfiiakati Police Station,
"'Re;§jrese:ni:e.d by-.SPP,
SE".'P"i)fice,' 7:;fimui: Bench,
Bhazwagi.' , RESPONDENT
"»{ayLs1:i.»9§' H. Gotkhjndi, i-ICGP)
V' " This Criminal Revision §'ci:ition is filed under sections
* and 491 of Cr.P.C. praying to set aside the order iaasaed
by the learned II Addl. District anti Sessions Judge,
Belgaum, in S.C.No.'7{}/2008 datw 17.103008, and etc.
The revision petition coming on for admissioxz, this
day, the Court made the foilowing:
ORDER
The petitioner is arrayed as &f3(3.t.1§fl1 " "
pending trial for ofiences punishable 417, 376 of IPC. The 1eaxned"$§:s§iofia' 'uIadg¢ ' the application filed by of an oficncc punishable undvara;-:cfiaa =
2. i have for petitioner and lcaxnedr.€3£$v;:r§;fi1;.ent':_@'k§fir9¢ai:e igar gm. _ _fo.rWp6titioncr has submitted that in "wider section 173(5) Cr.P.C, it is no Wham had sexual intezcourse with '% V' "'1z1;e'a'v--~§ige¢easec1, T:1é""aeccasea committed suicide. The gtafize to Cradhinglaj aficr purchasing a bottle Of V.'.E'}zci:.,ti=:V:.t'o1"t=:, there is no material to fimne charge "-.agai1:1st afécused for an ofience: punishable under section 376 'The ieamed Government Advocate would justify the V K - -. ' " ifiipugned order.
4. The law is fairly W611 sattled, at the time of framing charge coun: cannot make a threadbare analysis of 1 mm * W :4: about 21 years at the time of occurrence. Thus u had afi'a.1rs' with deceased since fiom her age 2 Thus; consent or otherwise of the Vi§3;t.i"¥LlV1d'iIt'.C€3T{I1€§'a iiniuatexiiai; The parents and other villagers 2 course of inveatigafion have '-sfated that dizietvileen 'V accused and deceased were the dentizei village. There was a Panchayadi' elders, before Whom accused<.l'33.;.ad "the deceased. Subsequently; d"b.1_:'<V)}<e to marry the deceased. became disgusted in fife and :::om1I3itted.__s4i}ici£ie._ «V '-- V' 5 _ At Stage of the case, there are no reasons to d 'e:;s"peot*7er Vdisbeiéededddihe contents of dying declaration as by parents and other V11' iagers. It is alscyifiotv. to hoki that deceased had consented to Hhave with accused. The circumstances home out by oéycords of investigation would reveal that accused had ail aiiong promised the deceased to marry her and had aeairs with her. Therefore, ieamed Magistrate was justified in melits.
sub* :5: hoiding that there is material to flame chargcs*..' 1:'orV punishable under sections 306, 417., 375 of ' f "
6. In the result, I '('EViSiOI,'.' His ; dismissed. However, it is made'v"e1;é:s.r the éhséxvafidps made herein shalt not be read 213. 'cxpitssioi; ofopinion £51: merits of the case and the learned Iviagi:-3if:t'!a€t: be influenced by the obse::va§1:ir;3'.VtA3.:Vs'V.:Vj'mar;{A__e: the case 03:1 sa/-:-