Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Bangalore District Court

State By Kamakshipalya P. S vs Chandrashekar S/O Ramaiah on 17 July, 2015

 IN THE COURT OF THE V ADDL. C.M.M., AT BENGALURU.

          Dated this the Friday the 17th day of July 2015

          Present:       Sri B. Venkatesha, B.Sc., LL.B.,
                          V Addl., CMM., Bengaluru.

                      CC No.20462/2012

Complainant                    State by Kamakshipalya P. S.,
                               (By Sr. APP B'lore)
                                    V/s
Accused                        1.Chandrashekar S/o Ramaiah, 33 Yrs.,
                                 R/a No.60/2, 3rd Main, 11th Cross,
                                 Rama Mandira, Kaveripura,
                                 Kamakshipalya, Bangalore.

                               2.Smt. Gangalakshmamma
                                 C /o Ramaiah, 66 Yrs.,

                               3.Ramaiah S/o Gangaiah, 72 Yrs.,

                               4.Smt. Manjula C/o nagaraju, 38 Yrs.,

                                 A-2 to 4 are R/a 6/1m, 2nd Main Road,
                                 5th Cross, Govindarajanagar,
                                 Bangalore.

                               (Rep. by Sri NLN, Adv.,)

              JUDGMENT AS PER SEC.355 Cr.P.C.,

1. Serial Number of the case         : CC No.20462/2012

2. Date of the commission of the
 offence                         :24.06.2007 to 9.2.2012

3.The name of the complainant        : Smt. Aswathkumari @ Asha
                                 2                 CC No.20462/2012


4.Name of the accused persons
 and their parentage and residence: As stated above.

5.The offence complained off : U/s.498A r/w Sec.34 of IPC
 and proved                    & U/s.3 and 4 of DP Act.

6.The plea of the accused and       : Pleaded not guilty and denied
 their examination                    the incriminating evidence.

7.The final order                   : Acquitted

8.The date of such order            : 17.07.2015

             THE BRIEF REASONS FOR FINAL ORDER:

     The prosecution's case in brief as set out in Cl. No.7 of

charge sheet is that the marriage of CW.1 Smt. Ashwathkumari

took place with accused No.1 at Bangalore, and accused No.2 to

4 are the relatives of accused No.1, and on demand at the time of

marriage the 1st accused received Rs.50,000/- cash, 15 grams

gold ornaments from the parents of complainant as dowry and

after the marriage complainant lead her matrimonial life with

accused No.1 along with accused No.2 to 4 at residential house

bearing No.6/1, 2nd Main Road, 5th Cross, Govindarajanagara,

Bangalore. For about three months, the accuseds were cordial
                                   3                CC No.20462/2012

with the complainant. Thereafter the accused started to ill-treat

the complainant physically and mentally by saying that the dowry

given at the time of marriage is not sufficient. They abused and

assaulted the complainant, and forced her to bring additional

dowry of Rs.2,00,000/- from her parents. Cws.2 to 5 have advised

the accused not to ill-treat the complainant, but the accused

ousted the complainant from the house, and further when the

complainant started to reside separately along with the accused

No.1,   on   a   rented   house       at   11th   Cross,     Kaveripura,

Kamakshipalya,    a   place   that     lies   within   the    limits   of

Kamakshipalya P.S., Bangalore. But even there also the accused

No.2 to 4 came and abused and assaulted the complainant by

stating that the complainant having illicit contacts when

complainant talks with others. They ill-treated her physically and

mentally, and on 9.2.2012 at about 8.00 a.m all the accused

picked up quarrel with the complainant and ousted her from the

said rented house and forced her to bring additional dowry of

Rs.2,00,000/- and ill-treated the complainant physically and
                                  4              CC No.20462/2012

mentally. Thus, the accused persons have committed the

aforesaid offences as alleged.

        2.During crime stage the accused persons enlarged on

regular bail. After submission of this charge sheet, this court has

taken cognizance of the aforesaid offences against the aforesaid

accused persons. Copies of the charge sheet have been furnished

to the accused persons as per Sec. 207 of Cr.P.C. With no

objection from the Counsel for the accused, this Court framed

charge for the aforesaid offences against them. The same read

over and explained to the accused in the language known to

them.     The accused persons have pleaded not guilty. The

prosecution has examined the complainant and CW.2 as PWs.1

and 2, and it has got marked three documents as Ex.P-1 to P-3.

Statement of the accused has been dispensed since no

incriminating evidence placed against them.

        3.Heard the arguments of both sides, perused evidence

placed before the court.
                                  5              CC No.20462/2012

      4.The Ex.P-1 is the complaint dtd., 26.02.2012 that

submitted to the Police Inspector, Kamakshipalya P.S., Bangalore.

Ex.P-2 the Mahazar dt., 26.02.2012 disclose that it was prepared

by the IO in the presence of the complainant and two other

panch witnesses in between 5.30 p.m. to 6.00 p.m. at residential

house belonging to Subramanyas' Building that situated at 11th

Cross, Kaveripura, Kamakshipalya, that situated at Kamaksipalya

P.S., limits, Bangalore.   Ex.P-3 is the statement of CW.2. Ex P-3

discloses that CW-2 has made his statement to the IO by

supporting the complaint.

      5.This case has been registered in view of the complaint

submitted by the complainant-Smt.Ashwathkumari @ Asha C/o R.

Chandrashekar, R/a No.60/2, 3rd Main, 11th Cross, Near Rama

Mandira, Kaveripura, Kamakshipalya, Bangalore. In the complaint

marked at Ex.P1, the complainant has specifically stated to the

then SHO of Kamakshipalya P.S., by reiterating almost all the

facts as averred in Col., 7 of the charge sheet and in Para No.1 of

this judgment.     Ex.P-1 discloses that the first accused No.1
                                6              CC No.20462/2012

Chandra Shekar is the husband of the complainant, and accused

No.2 to 4 are the relatives of the accused No.1. Ex.P-3 discloses

that the PW-2 has stated to the IO by supporting the contents of

Ex.P-1.

     6.Whereas during the course of examination in chief,

complainant-Smt.Ashwathkumari      and   PW-2    have   deposed

evidence before this Court that the accused persons never caused

physical or mental cruelty on PW-1 with a demand to bring

additional dowry. PW-1 has deposed that she was not lodged the

complaint against the accused persons by stating that they have

been causing physical and mental cruelty on her for the dowry

demand. She has specifically stated that signatures marked as

Ex.P1a and 2a on documents marked at Ex.P-1 and 2 are her

signatures. But, she didn't know the contents of the documents

marked in Ex.P-1 and 2. PW.1 has deposed that she didn't know

that for when, where and for what reason she put her signatures

on the documents marked as Ex.P-1 and P-2.
                                  7              CC No.20462/2012

     7.PW's 1 & 2 are treated as a hostile witnesses at the

request of the prosecution.          They are subjected to cross

examination on behalf of case of the prosecution. But nothing is

elicited in support of the case of the prosecution in the evidence

of PW's.1 & 2 that recorded during the course of their respective

cross-examination. PW-2 has deposed that he didn't made

statement to the police as per Ex P-3. The evidence of PW.1 and

2 did not disclose that the accused persons have committed the

offences as alleged against them. Since the complainant and her

father are turned as hostile, other witnesses have been

discharged since no purpose would be survived if they were

examined in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court that

reported in 1996(3) Crime 85.          Therefore, it would be very

difficult to accept that the accused persons have committed the

aforesaid offences as alleged. Therefore, I am of opinion that the

prosecution miserably has failed to prove its case as alleged

against the accused persons beyond all reasonable doubt. The

accused persons are entitled for acquittal.
                                     8                CC No.20462/2012

      8. In view of the aforesaid discussion, this court proceed to

pass the following:-

                                ORDER

By acting U/s 248(1) Cr.P.C. the aforesaid accused No.1 to 4 are hereby acquitted of the offences punishable under Secs.498A r/w Sec.34 of IPC and Sec.3 and 4 of D. P. Act.

They shall be set at liberty forthwith if they are not required to other cases. However, their bail and surety bonds are hereby extended for a period of 6 months from this date in view of Secs.437(A) of Cr.P.C., (Dictated to the Stenographer through computer and after corrections made by me and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the Friday the 17th day of July 2015).

(B.VENKATESHA) V Addl. C.M.M., Bengaluru ANNEXURE

1. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION:

PW.1 Smt. Ashwathkumari

2. LIST OF THE DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION:

Ex.P1 : Complaint dtd., 26.02.2012 Ex.P2 : Mahazar dt., 26.02.2012

3. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED AND DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE DEFENCE: NIL.

4. LIST OF THE MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION: NIL.

(B. VENKATESHA) V Addl., C.M.M., Bengaluru.

9 CC No.20462/2012

17.07.2015 Case called. A-1 to A-4 present State by Sr. APP Judgement pronounced in the open Court as under

A-1 to A-4 on bail vide separate Judgement kept in the file For Judgement By acting U/s 248(1) Cr.P.C. the aforesaid accused No.1 to 4 are hereby acquitted of the offences punishable under Secs.498A r/w Sec.34 of IPC and Sec.3 and 4 of D. P. Act.
They shall be set at liberty forthwith if they are not required to other cases. However, their bail and surety bonds are hereby extended for a period of 6 months from this date in view of Secs.437(A) of Cr.P.C., (B.VENKATESHA) V Addl.C.M.M., B'luru.
10 CC No.20462/2012 11 CC No.20462/2012