Bangalore District Court
The State Of Karnataka vs A-1. Niranjan Kumar on 29 April, 2023
KABC010201662004
IN THE COURT OF THE LI ADDL. CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU CITY. (CCH 52)
Dated this the 29th day of April 2023
:PRESENT:
Sri. Yashawanth Kumar, B.A.(Law), LL.B,
LI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City.
S.C. No. 538/2004
Complainant : The State of Karnataka,
By Sanjay nagar police Station,
Bengaluru.
(By Spl. Public Prosecutor)
Vs.
Accused : A-1. Niranjan Kumar
S/o Dr. Somashekar Naidu,
Aged 28 years, R/o Flat No. 202,
Dollars Residency, HIG Colony,
Sanjay Nagara,Bengaluru.
A-2. Dr. Somashekar Naidu,
S/o. Late K.Munibabu Naidu,
Aged 56 years, R/o Berry street,
Pillipattu Town, Thiruvallur Dist.
Tamil Nadu.
A-3 Smt. Leelavathi,
W/o. Dr. Somashekar Naidu,
Aged 52 years, R/o Berry street,
Pillipattu Town, Thiruvallur Dist.
Tamil Nadu.
(Accused No.1 to 3 by Sri. ERGN, Advocates)
2
SC No.538/2004
1 Date of commission of offence 2/3.4.2004
2 Date of report of offence 05.4.2004
3 Date of arrest of the accused 05.4.2004
4 Date of release of accused on bail 01.12.2004
5 Date of commencement of 16.7.2007
evidence
6 Date of closing of evidence 24.9.2021
7 Name of the complainant Sri. Vijaya Naval Patil
8 Offences complained of Sections 304-B, 302 R/w. 34 of I.P.C
9 Date of pronouncement of 27.4.2023
judgment
10 Opinion of the Judge Guilt of accused No.1 to 3 is not proved.
11 Order or Sentence As per final-order
JUDGMENT
The Police Inspector, H & T, C.O.D., Bengaluru, has filed charge-sheet against accused No.1 to 3 for the offences punishable under Sections 304-B, 302 R/w. 34 of I.P.C. and Sec. 3 and 4 of Dowry prohibition Act, after completing the investigation in Cr. No. 62/2004 registered in Sanjay Nagar Police station. 3
SC No.538/2004
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as under:-
Deceased Smt. Kirti is the wife of accused No.1. Accused No.2 is the father and accused No.3 is mother of accused No.1. Cw-1 Vijay Naval Patil is the father and Cw-2 Sheela Patil is the mother, Cw-3 Priyadharshini Patil and Cw-4 Pragnya Jagathap are the sisters of deceased Smt. Kirti. Deceased Kirti was an Architect. Accused No.1 is a Medical Graduate. But, he was in to construction business. Prior to the marriage, deceased was having her office in Mumbai. The deceased and accused No.1 got introduced to each other through internet chatting and thereafter, there was love affair between them and they got married with the consent of the parents of both deceased and the accused No.1, on 17.2.2022 at Tirupathi. After the marriage, they were residing in Flat No. 202 at Dollar's Residency, HIG colony, Sanjay nagar, Bengaluru. Accused No.1 used to demand money from deceased Kirti for his construction activities, and by saying that he was in a financial crisis. Further, he was having extra marital relationship with one Anitha Rani. There used to be quarrel between the deceased and accused No.1 in connection with said relationship. The deceased wanted to find out who said Anitha Rani was. For the above reasons, accused No.1 was subjecting the deceased Kirti to mental and physical ill-treatment.4
SC No.538/2004 On the intervening night of 2.4.2004 and 3.4.2004, the accused No.1 committed the murder of the deceased Smt. Kirti in the above said house. The accused No.2 and 3 being the parents of the accused No.1 colluded with him No.1 in the commission of the offence.
3. On coming to know about the incident, Cw-54/Pw-1 R.D. Lavande , Retd IGP of Mumbai who is a relative of deceased, came to Bengaluru along with Cw-2 and Cw-3 and 2 others. Pw-1 lodged a complaint on 3.4.2004 at 10 a.m. to Sanjay nagar police as per Ex. P-25 regarding unnatural death. On the basis of the same, the police registered UDR No. 10/2004 U/sec. 174 -C of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, Cw-1/Pw-3 Vijay Patil, father of the deceased came to Bengaluru and he lodged a complaint with Spl. Executive Magistrate, during the inquest proceedings on 3.4.2004. On the basis of said complaint, the Sanjay nagar police registered a case on 5.4.2004 at 4.30 p.m. in their Cr. No. 162/2004 for the offence punishable U/sec. 302 of IPC.
4. The inquest panchanama and post mortem examination on the dead body was conducted on 3.4.2004 itself. The Sanjay nagar police conducted investigation into the case. Subsequently, the 5 SC No.538/2004 investigation was handed over to the COD as per the order of government. The COD police collected various documents, recorded the statements of witnesses, obtained various reports from the FSL. Meanwhile, after taking the dead body to their native place i.e., Mumbai, the parents of the deceased got conducted second post mortem examination in JJ Hospital, Mumbai. After completion of the investigation the COD police filed charge-sheet against the accused No.1 to 3.
5. After the committal proceedings, the case committed to this court for trial. The accused No.1 to 3 are on bail. The prosecution papers and documents supplied to them. Heard before the charge. Charge framed for the offences punishable U/sec. 302, 304-B, 498-A R/w. Sec. 34 of IPC and Sec. 3,4 and 6 of Dowry prohibition Act. The charge is read over the explained to the accused No. 1 to 3. They pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence case posted for prosecution evidence.
6. To prove its case, the prosecution examined in all 46 witnesses as Pw-1 to P-46 and got marked documents at Ex.P-1 to P-147 and Material objects at MO. 1 to 87.
6
SC No.538/2004
7. Accused No.1 to 3 examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. All the incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence read over the explained to them. They denied the same. The accused persons have not lead evidence on their behalf. However, they have got marked Ex. D-1 and D-2 through prosecution witnesses.
8. On the application of prosecution, the charge for the offences punishable U/sec 304-B has been re-casted, read over and explained to accused No.1 to 3. They pleaded not guilty. However, neither prosecution nor defence, led evidence after recasting of the charge.
9. Heard the arguments of learned Spl. P.P. for state and he has filed his written arguments. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for accused No.1 to 3.
10. After completion of arguments of both sides, the prosecution filed an application U/sec. 294 of Cr.P.C. calling upon the accused persons either admit or deny the documents produced by them. Certified copies of documents in RCC No. 219/2007 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate First class (Court No. 10), Dhule, including charge and depositions. The said application was 7 SC No.538/2004 allowed by this court by the order dt: 20.2.2023. On 6.3.2023, the counsel for the accused No.1 to 3 filed memo stating that the accused No.1 to 3 admits the filing of the case in RCC No. 219/2007 before the learned JMFC, Dhule, Maharastra State for the offences punishable U/sec. 420, 494, 120-B R/w. Sec. 34 of IPC and it is pending. But, they did not admit the contents of any of the documents placed before the court.
11. The following points arise for my consideration:-
(1) Whether the prosecution proves the involvement of accused No.2 and 3 in any way in this case?
(2) Whether the accused No.1 received dowry of more than Rs. 15 lakhs from the parents of deceased Kirti by way of dowry?
(3) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that after his marriage with deceased Kirti, accused No.1 demanded additional dowry in the form of cash from her parents?
(4) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that accused No.1 having received dowry from the parents of deceased Keerthy failed to return the same within 3 months to them?
(5) Whether the prosecution proves that deceased was subjected to cruelty to meet the demand of dowry?
8
SC No.538/2004 (6) Whether the prosecution proves the extra marital relationship of accused No.1?
(7) Whether the prosecution proves that the death of deceased Kirti was homicidal?
(8) Whether the prosecution proves that accused No.1 has caused death of deceased Kirti?
(9) Whether the death of deceased Kirti is culpable homicide amounting to murder or culpable homicide not amounting to murder?
(10) Whether the prosecution alternatively proves that the death of deceased Kirti was a dowry death and it was caused by accused No.1?
(11) What order?
12. My findings on the above said 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 .. In the Negative,
Point No.6 .. In the Negative,
Point No.7 .. In the Negative,
Point No.8 .. In the Negative,
Point No.9 .. Does not arise for consideration
Point No.10.. In the Negative,
Point No.11.. As per the final order,
for the following:
9
SC No.538/2004
REASONS
13. Before taking up the above points for discussion, it is relevant to note some of the admitted facts in this case. Those are as under:-
Deceased Kirti was an Architect. Accused No.1 studied MBBS in Ramaiah Medical College. But, he was into construction field. The deceased and accused No.1 got in touch through inter-net chatting, it developed into a love affair. Both informed it to their respective families.
Accused No.2 and 3 are the parents of the accused No.1.
Cw 1 and 2 are the parents of deceased Kirti. Cws. 3 and 4 are the sisters of deceased Kirti. Both the families agreed for the marriage of accused No.1 and deceased Kirti.
Accordingly, the marriage took place on 16th and 17th of February 2002 at Tirupati. After the marriage, accused No.1 and the deceased Kirti were living in Bengaluru, in Flat No. 202, Dollar's Residency, HIG Colony, Sanjay nagar.
In the intervening night of 2.4.2004 and 3.4.2004 the accused took the deceased Kirti to M.S.Ramaiah hospital, Bengaluru, where she was declared 'brought dead'.10
SC No.538/2004
14. Point No.1 : Along with accused No.1, allegations of dowry demand, murder, dowry death are made against accused No.2 and 3 also. 13. Pw-12 Srinivasa Murthy is a resident of Flat No. 204, Pw-11 Veena is the resident of flat No. 203, Pw-10 Y.R. Nagaraj was a resident of flat No. 101, Pw-16 Wilson was working as a security guard in Dollar's Residency apartment. Accused No.1 and deceased were residing in Flat No. 202 of Dollar's Residency.
15. Pw-11 has stated in his evidence that accused No. 1 was residing in Flat No. 202 and he has also seen his wife Kirti. But, he never talked to either accused No.1 or his wife Kirti. It is his evidence that he does not know anything about them. It is his evidence that he came to know about death of Kirti from his neighbours after her death. In his cross-examination, he has stated that accused No.1 and deceased Kirti were in cordial terms and he has not seen them quareling with each other. In Flat No. 202 only accused and Kirti were residing.
16. Pw-12 has stated that he was residing in Flat No. 204 of Dollar's Residency. But he does not know about accused No.1 and his parents so also wife of accused No.1. It is his evidence that he came to know about the death of Kirti subsequent to her death. 11
SC No.538/2004
17. Pw-17 Suresh was a Security guard of Dollar's Residency. He has stated that he and his brother Wilson were working as security guards in the said apartment. In his cross-examination he has stated that both the accused No.1 and deceased were in cordial terms.
18. Pw-10 Y.R. Nagaraj was a resident of flat No. 101 of Dollar's Residency apartment. He has stated that accused No.1 was residing in Flat No. 202 of the said apartment. But, he does not know the parents of accused No.1. He has seen the wife of accused No.1 by name Kirti. But, it is his evidence that he never talked to accused No.1 and he never observed accused No.1 and his wife closely. In his cross-examination he has stated that accused No.1 and deceased Kirti were in cordial terms and he has not seen them quarelling with each other. It is also his evidence that in flat No. 202, only accused No.1 and his wife were residing.
19. Pw-16 Wilson has stated in his evidence that he was working as a security guard in Dollar's Residency apartment. Accused No.1 was residing in Flat No. 202 of the said apartment along with his wife Kirti. In his cross-examination he has stated that 12 SC No.538/2004 accused No.1 and his wife were living happily in the said apartment.
20. The above witnesses are the neighbours and security guards of apartment wherein accused No.1 was living along with his wife Kirti. There is no evidence helpful to the prosecution from them regarding the relationship between accused No.1 and his wife deceased Kirti. No one has stated that accused no.2 and 3 were residing with accused no.1 and deceased Kirti. When accused no2 and 3 were not residing with accused no.1 and deceased Kirti the possibility of committing the alleged offenses by accused no.2 and 3 is less.
21. There is evidence of relatives of deceased Kirti that accused No.2 and 3 were demanding dowry from deceased Kirti. But, they have not stated that accused No.2 and 3 directly demanded dowry with them. Their evidence is that they demanded money with deceased Kirti and she informed the same to them over phone but there is no supporting evidence to the same. There is no evidence that accused No.2 and 3 subjected deceased Kirti to cruelty to meet their illegal demand of dowry. 13
SC No.538/2004
22. Pw-3 in his chief examination has stated that deceased Kirti informed him that after the marriage of her younger sister, accused No.1 and his parents were demanding more money as Pw- 3 spent huge money for the marriage of her younger sister. In the further chief examination he has stated that at the time of marriage, he had given a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs to accused No.1 to 3. It is also stated by him that about 3 months prior to the death of Kirti, the harassment by accused No.2 and 3 increased. Pw-3 has also stated that it was mentioned to him through his relative and his friend Gulab Rao Patil, by accused No.2 that a Doctor in Andhra would get dowry of Rs. 1 Crore. Pw-5 who is mother of deceased has stated in her chief examination that accused No.1 along with his parents ill-treating her. These are the only evidence against accused No.2 and 3.
23. Pw-13 who is another sister of deceased Kirti and Pw-14 who is the huhusband of Pw-13, have not stated about demand of dowry by accused No.2 and 3. Their evidence is totally silent regarding the alleged demand of dowry and ill-treatment in respect of the same by accused No.2 and 3 to deceased Keerthi. Their evidence is in respect of demand of money by accused No.1 only. Moreover, in the complaint as per Ex.P-3 lodged by Pw-3, 14 SC No.538/2004 there is nothing against accused No.2 and 3. Even in the earlier complaint by Pw-1 marked as Ex.P-25 also, no allegation has been made against accused No.2 and 3. Pws 3 and 5 have admitted in their evidence that they have not given statements before the police that accused No.2 and 3 harassing deceased by demanding dowry.
24. There is no evidence that accused No.2 and 3 caused, instigated, abated the commission of murder of deceased Kirti, in any manner. The evidence shows the presence of accused No.2 and 3 at the time when the dead body was in the hospital. It is specifically stated against accused No.2 that he was going inside and outside the hospital and mortuary. But, there is no allegation against him that he was in any way involved in the commission of the offences alleged against him. There is nothing to show that accused No.2 and 3 shared common intention to do away with the life of deceased Kirti. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the prosecution failed to prove any of the offences against accused No.2 and 3. Under such circumstances, the evidence is not sufficient against by accused No.2 and 3. Accordingly, I answer Point No.1 in the Negative.
15
SC No.538/2004
25. Point No. 2, 3, 4 and 5:- Pw-3 is the father of the deceased. Ex. P-3 is the complaint of Pw-3. In it, it is stated that they had given a sum of Rs. 5 lakh during the marriage which was the money kept for deceased Kirti by her grand parents. It does not appear that the said Rs. 5 lakhs was given on the demand of accused persons. However, it is stated that after the marriage, accused No.1 was going to Mumbai and demanding money for his construction business, therefore, he had given a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs in the previous year i.e., in the year 2003. It is also stated by him that the accused No.1 had returned said money and futher accused No.1 had asked for loan for his coffee export business from him and his other son-in-laws; accused No.1 was having some bill of Rs. 9,92,000/- against JCB hiring and other purposes, which he got from his(Pw-3) another son-in-law Mr. Ravindra Jagatap. Further, it is stated in the complaint that after developing little confidence, accused No.1 asked for more money and during the previous 3 months he had given him 6 lakhs rupees in cash. In total, accused no.1 has taken a sum of Rs. 23 lakhs from all his relatives.
26. As per Ex. P-3 the money which was given at the time of marriage was not given on the demand of accused persons. A sum of Rs. 5 Lakhs given by Pw-3 in the year 2003 was returned by 16 SC No.538/2004 Accused No.1. Another sum of Rs. 9,92,000/- was in connection with JCB hiring and other charges. The above amounts does not amount to dowry. Though, he has stated that he has given him Rs. 6 lakhs in cash and, he and his other relatives have given in total Rs. 23 lakhs, there is nothing in the complaint that it was given as dowry. It appears that the said monies were given for the business purpose of accused No.1.
27. Pw-3 has stated in his evidence that about 4 times deceased Kirti came along with accused No.1 to Mumbai to collect money on the pretext that money required for construction work. Somewhere in October 2003, she asked to give a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs, when she had come along with accused No.1. At that time Pw-3 was not having cash of Rs. 10 lakhs, therefore, he gave a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs to his daughter Kirti. At that time, Kirti told Pw-3 that accused No.1 to 3 were demanding for more money saying Pw-3 could spend more money for the marriage of his younger daughter. It is also told by her to Pw-3 that accused No.1 was telling that her father has got more money to purchase Flats at Nasik, but he has no money to his son-in-law at Bengaluru.
28. In his further chief examination, Pw-3 has stated that accused No.1 in all paid a sum of Rs. 23 lakhs on various occasions. 17
SC No.538/2004 Pw-3 has also stated that it was mentioned to him through his relative and his friend Gulab Rao Patil by accused No.2 that a Doctor in Andhra would get dowry of Rs. 1 Crore.
29. In his further cross-examination Pw-3 has stated that he had given a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs to accused No.1 and his parents at the time of marriage. Later on accused No.1 to 3 started making demand for money on one or other pretext. As already stated, in the complaint, it has been stated that a sum of Rs. 5 Lakhs was given at the time of marriage, which was kept for deceased Kirti by her grand parents and there was nothing either in the complaint or in the evidence to show that the said money was paid on the demand of the accused persons.
30. Pw-3 has stated that on 11.4.2003, they gave a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs to accused No.1 through his another son-in-law Mr. Ravindra Jagatap at Pune, but it did not satisfy accused No.1 and his parents, they kept on harassing his daughter Kirti. Therefore, again he gave a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs to accused No.1 in October 2003, when accused No.1 had came to Mumbai along with his daughter Kirti. Pw-3 has stated that since 3 months prior to her death, harassment increased by accused No.2 and 3 and between 18 SC No.538/2004 January 2004 to April 2004, she was constantly telling the same to his another daughter Mrs. Pragnya. He has reiterated that he and his relatives given a sum of Rs. 23 lakhs to accused No.1.
31. In his cross-examination Pw-3 has stated that he has given a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs on two occasions and remaining payments were given by his relatives. Out of the two payments of Rs. 5 Lakhs made by him to accused No.1, first payment of Rs. 5 lakhs was returned by accused no.1 to him. He has stated that he had the confidence that accused No.1 would return the second payment of Rs. 5 lakhs within March 2004. When the first payment of Rs. 5 lakhs was returned by accused No.1 and second payment was also to be returned to Pw-3, it cannot be said that those payments were made as dowry to accused No.1. It appears that the said amounts were given to accused No.1 for the purpose of his business. Though Pw-3 has stated that the said amount was given as dowry. Regarding second payment of Rs. 5 lakhs is concerned, Pw-3 has stated that he has not stated same before the police. Therefore, it is stated before the court for the first time.
32. Pw-3 has stated that in April 2003 his son-in-law had accommodated Rs. 9,92,000/- to accused No.1. It is stated that a 19 SC No.538/2004 sum of 5 lakhs given by his daughter to accused No.1. Accused No.1 had paid interest on first installment. Therefore, it appears that the said sum of Rs. 5 lakhs was given to accused No.1 as a loan and it does not appear to be a dowry. Further Pw-3 has stated that his daughter i.e., Ravindra Jagatap's wife has received interest in respect of one cheque. Pw-3 has admitted that M/s. Surya enterprises belongs to his son-in-law Ravindra Jagatap and M/s Niran Arcade, Bengaluru is a complex in the name of accused No.1. He has stated that he does not remember whether M/s. Surya Enterprises, Pune had encashed a cheque of Rs. 9,92,000/- in the name of Niran Arcade, Bengaluru.
33. Pw-4 Smt. Priyadarshini Patil is the sister of deceased Kirti. She has stated in her evidence that deceased Kirti was in touch with her through telephone. On 30.3.2004 deceased Kirti called her 3 times and told her that accused No.1 to 3 demanding more dowry from her. Pw-4 has further stated that her father has given Rs. 5 Lakhs to accused No.1 in the month of October 2003. In her cross-examination she has stated that she came to know about her father giving a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs to accused No.1 from her father. The evidence of Pw-4 discloses that she had not seen her 20 SC No.538/2004 father giving a sum of Rs. 5 Lakhs to accused No.1 during October 2003.
34. Pw-5 Smt. Sheela Patil is the mother of deceased Kirti. She has stated in her evidence that at the time of marriage of deceased Kirti and accused No.1, her friends and relatives have given gifts to Kirti. They have given 30 Thola of gold to Kirti and a chain, bracelet and a ring to accused No.1 as a gift. According to Pw-5 herself, those gold ornaments were given as gift. Therefore, it cannot be termed as dowry. However, Pw-5 has further stated that they have given Rs. 5 Lakhs to accused No.1 on the demand of accused No.1. She has also stated that deceased Kirti had come to Mumbai along with accused No.1 to take money from them. It is their further evidence that accused No.1 and his parents i.e., accused No.2 and 3 were regularly asked for money and ill-treating her mentally and physically. Again in the month of April 2003 they have demanded money. At that time her husband i.e., Pw-3 asked his another son-in-law Ravindra Jagatap to give a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs and to receive the said money accused No.1 had to come to Pune in the of May. Again, accused No.1 demanded for money in the month of October 2003. Accused No.1 came to Mumbai to receive the money. At that time he demanded for a sum of Rs. 10 21 SC No.538/2004 lakhs to purchase a Flat. At that time she (Pw-5) give a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs which was with her to her husband and her husband in turn gave that money to accused No.1. In spite of that accused No.1 was asking for money regularly. In the month of December 2003 and January 2004, her husband has given a sum of Rs. 6 lakhs to accused No.1. It is the evidence of Pw-5 that again on 2.4.2004 at 9 a.m. deceased Kirti called her through phone and informed that accused No.1 and his parents were giving physical and mental ill- treatment to her and demanding money from her.
35. In her further chief examination, Pw-5 has given details of valuable articles given to deceased Kirti and got marked it as M.O.s No.1 to 82. It is her evidence that among those articles MO1 Titan watch, MO12 and 13 Rings were given to accused No.1 and MO. 26 Necklace was given to accused No.3. She has stated that among them only 2-3 items were silver items and all other items were gold items. But, the evidence of Pw-5 does not disclose that M.O.s No.1 to 82 were given on the demand of accused No.1 to 3. Moreover except three items, all other items were given to deceased Kirti.
36. In her cross-examination Pw-5 has stated that she does not know that on 23.1.2004, a sum of Rs. 20,000/- was transferred from 22 SC No.538/2004 the account of accused No.1 to her account as interest for the loan borrowed by him from them. She has stated that she does not know anything about the money transaction or bank transaction between her husband, her daughter and accused No.1. She has stated that accused No.1 has not taken money from her directly. It is also the evidence of Pw-1 that the marriage expenses were borne by accused themselves. She has stated that she does not know the expenses of travel and other expenses of 400-500 people who had attended the marriage from their side were borne by accused themselves. It is her evidence that she does not know about income tax. A sum of Rs. 5 Lakhs was with her and she does not know whether she has given documents to police for having Rs. 5 lakhs with her.
37. Pw-13 Pragnya Jagatap is another sister of deceased Kirti. She has stated in her evidence that in the month of August 2002 deceased Kirti called her through phone and asked her to as whether she could give money to her as the same was demanded by accused No.1. Deceased Kirti asked her for Rs. 5Lakhs. She asked her husband to arrange for said money. But, he was not having Rs. 5 Lakhs, was having only Rs. 3 Lakhs. On the next day, Kirti came in a flight to Pune and took the said sum of Rs. 3 Lakhs. Thereafter, 23 SC No.538/2004 one day again accused No.1 called her husband for money and sent SMS regarding the same. At that time, her father Pw-3 gave a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs to her husband. Accused No.1 came in a flight to Pune and took the said sum of Rs. 10 lakhs. Accused No.1 asked for more money. Accused No.1 assured to return the said money within 3-4 months through cheque. Accordingly, he gave 2-3 cheques to her husband. As accused No.1 asked for more money her husband gave a sum of Rs. 10,90,000/- to accused No.1. It is the evidence of Pw-13 that when she asked her husband why he took cheques from accused No.1, her husband told her that in order to prevent accused No.1 asking for money again and again, he has taken those cheques from him. On 23.3.2004 Kirti called her in the morning and informed that on the previous night accused No.1 quarreled with her demanding money. Again Pw-13 asked her husband to give money to Kirti. Kirti asked for Rs. 15 lakhs. But, her husband was not having that much of money. Therefore he gave a cheque for Rs. 9,92,000/- which was in his account.
38. In her cross-examination Pw-13 has stated that she is an income tax assessee. But, she has not mentioned the amount given either to Kirti or to accused No.1 in her income tax returns. She has stated that she has maintained an account book. But, she has not 24 SC No.538/2004 mentioned regarding the money given to Kirti and her husband in the said book. She has admitted that she has taken three cheques of Rs. 10,000/- and one cheque of Rs. 7,500/- from accused No.1. She has stated that she has not taken those cheques either for repayment of money or towards interest on the money given to Kirti or accused No.1. She has admitted that those cheques were drawn on Standard Charerd Bank, Bengaluru. Further, she has stated that her husband has taken 3-4 cheques from accused No.1. The total amount in those cheques was Rs. 10,60,000/-. Those cheques were drawn on Citi Bank, M.G.Road Branch. The above evidence of Pw-13 shows that accused No.1 had paid a sum of Rs. 37,500/- to Pw-13 through 4 cheques and he has paid a sum of Rs. 10,60,000/- to the husband of Pw-13 through 4 cheques. Pw-13 has stated that they have paid a sum of Rs. 3 Lakhs and Rs. 10,60,000/- to accused No.1 for his necessities. It is her evidence that accused No.1 has not asked a sum of Rs. 10,60,000/- from her parents. Pw- 13 has admitted that her husband is doing irrigation business in the name of M/s Surya Enterprises.
39. Pw-14 Ravindra Jagatap is the husband of Pw-13. He has stated in his evidence that in the month of August 2002 Kirti asked for money through telephone saying that same was demanded by 25 SC No.538/2004 accused No.1. Accordingly he has given a sum of Rs. 3Lakhs to Kirti, which was with his wife. After 1½ months again accused No.1 called him (Pw-14) directly and asked for money. Pw-14 informed the same to his father in law i.e., Pw-3. At that time his father in law arranged for a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs and asked him to pay the money to accused. No.1. Accordingly, he has given the said sum of Rs. 10 lakhs to accused No.1. On 11.4.2003 accused No.1 had came to Pune Airport and Pw-14 with his wife gave a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs to accused No.1. At that time accused No.1 asked for more money and Pw-14 gave Rs. 60,000/- to accused No.1 in addition to the said Rs. 10 lakhs. Accused No.1 gave 4 post dated cheques stating that he would return the said money. When his wife Pw-13 asked as to why he has taken cheques from accused No.1. Pw-14 told her that he would not put those cheques to the bank.
40. On 23.3.2004 again Kirti called and asked for money immediately and informed that on the previous day there was quarrel between herself and accused No.1 in connection with money. Therefore, Pw-14 transferred a sum of Rs. 9,92,000/- which was in his account through inter-net to the account of accused No.1.
26
SC No.538/2004
41. In his cross-examination Pw-14 has stated that he is doing irrigation business in the name of M/s. Surya Enterprises and he is an income tax assessee. He has maintained his books of accounts . From those documents the amount given to others can be made- out. He has stated that at the time of paying Rs. 10,60,000/- to accused No.1 he has taken 4 cheques from accused No.1. But he has not given those cheques to police.
42. Pw-36 Gulab Rao Triyanbak Patil has stated in his evidence that he has participated in the marriage function of accused No.1 and Kirti at Tirupati. Thereafter, in the month of February 2003, he had met accused persons in the marriage of Rakhi who was the sister of deceased Kirti at Nasik. At that time the accused persons told him that, if accused No.1 who was a doctor, had married their relatives in Andra pradesh, they would have got dowry of Rs. 1 crore, but Kirti's parents have not given a single rupee as dowry to accused No.1. Accused No.2 and 3 told him that accused No.1 was a fool. They asked Pw-36 to inform the same to the parents of Kirti and to get dowry for accused No.1. It is the evidence of Pw-36 that he informed the same to the parents of Kirti. In his cross-examination, he has denied the suggestion that he is stating the same for the first time before court. It is his 27 SC No.538/2004 evidence that Kirti's house was at a distance of 100 ft from his house.
43. Pw-42 Dr. Mangala Chowhan has stated in her evidence that she knows accused No.1. His wife Kirti was the daughter of her brother. After the marriage, when Kirti's mother visited their house in the month of April, May 2003 was informed her that accused No.1 was demanding a sum of Rs.10 to 20 lakhs saying that in Andra pradesh a doctor would get dowry of Rs. 1 crore. Further, it is her evidence that Kirti's mother informed her that the accused persons were ill-treating Kirti physically and mentally. In her cross- examination she has stated that Kirti and accused No.1never visited her house at Aurangabad. Further, she did not get an opportunity to meet the accused No.1 at Bengaluru. She has denied the suggestion that she is giving false evidence against the accused persons to harass them.
44. Pw-25 Shivaputhrappa was the Spl. Taluk executive Magistrate, who has conducted inquest panchanama on the dead body of deceased Kirti. He has stated that at the time of inquest panchanama, he has recorded the statements of Pw-5 Sheela Patil and Pw-4 Priyadarshini Patil. In his cross-examination he has stated 28 SC No.538/2004 that the dowry aspect which Pw-4 and 5 have stated in their evidence before the court, has not been stated before him.
45. Pw-43 K. Purushotham was the investigating officer, when the investigation was being done by Sanjay nagar Police station. In his evidence also he has stated that Pw-3 has not stated before him that accused No. 1 in all obtained an amount of Rs. 23 lakhs from him on various occasions. PW3 has not stated before him that Pw-3 has given a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs to accused No.1 and his parents at the time of marriage. That on 11.4.2003 they gave a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs to accused No.1 through another son-in-law Ravindra Jagtap, at Pune. He has stated that Pw-3 has not stated before him that they gave a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs to accused No.1 in October 2003 when he came to Mumbai along with his wife Kirti. Pw-43 has stated that Pw-13 Smt. Pragnya has not stated before him that she and her husband gave a sum of Rs. 3 lakhs to Kirti in Pune Airport. Thereafter, her father gave a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs through her husband i.e., Pw-14 to accused No.1 and when accused No.1 asked for more money her husband gave a sum of Rs. 60,000/- in addition to Rs. 10 lakhs.
29
SC No.538/2004
46. Considering the evidence available on record, there is no reference to dowry in the complaint given by Pw-1 as per Ex. P-25 on 3.4. 2004. Though, there is reference regarding some money aspects in the complaint as per Ex.P-3 given by Pw-3, those transactions does not appear to be demand of money or dowry by accused persons. It appears that those money transactions were business transactions. There is no documentary evidence before the court to show the payment of money to accused No.1. The oral evidence discloses about payment of monies to accused No.1, but it does not appear that it was given in the form of dowry. It does not appear that the said monies were given on the demand of the accused person. The evidence discloses that the accused No.1 has taken money from his father-in-law and co-brother, but there is evidence to show that he has returned some of the monies to them. I also shows that he has issued cheques at the time of receiving those monies. It also appears that some of the monies were paid towards the work done by acused No.1. If there was dowry demand by the accused persons particularly by accused No.1, it would have found its place in the first two complaints i.e., Ex.P-25 and Ex.P-3. In fact, Ex.P-3 reached the police only on 5.4.2004 after 2 days of the incident. Therefore, there is no 30 SC No.538/2004 sufficient evidence before the court to prove the demand of dowry, receipt of dowry and subjecting deceased Kirthi to cruelty meet their demand of dowry. According I answer 2 , 3, 4 and 5 in the Negative.
47. Point No.6:- Pw-3 has stated in his evidence that he has filed Ex. P-3 complaint to the Spl. Executive Magistrate after death of his daughter Kirti. In it, he has alleged that there was continuous demand for money from accused No.1 to 3 and there was a call on the previous day to his wife by Kirti that she wanted to go to the house of Anitha Rani to find out the truth about the relationship of accused No.1 with Anitha Rani and on the date of death, accused No.1 wanted to stop Kirti from going to the house of Anitha Rani. He has further stated in his evidence that his relative Milind Patil told him about the mobile phone details of accused No.1 and that apart from Anitha Rani and accused No.1 was also in contact with one Asha Rose D'souza and he had requested the investigating officer to find out the last mobile phone calls of his daughter Kirti and also to investigate about the information given by Milind Patil. It is the evidence of Pw-3 that his daughter Kirti was done away to prevent the relationship between accused No.1 and Anitha Rani from coming out and also because of dowry. Pw-3 has stated that 31 SC No.538/2004 the the money of Rs. 23 lakhs given to accused No.1 was used to repay the loan taken by accused No.1 to purchase a bungalow for his alleged earlier wife. On 30.3.2004 and 31.3.2004 there was big quarrel between accused No.1 and his daughter Kirti for the issue of money and Anitha Rani. On 3.4.2004, his daughter Kirti along with her business collegue Kariayappa wanted to go to Anitha Rani's house. In order to prevent her to go to Anitha Rani's house to find out the truth, she was murdered. In his cross-examination he has stated that before the police his daughter wanted to go to the house of Anitha Rani to find out the truth and to stop her from doing so, she was done away with.
48. In his cross-examination he has stated that he does not remember whether he has stated before the I.O. about the above said aspects of the relationship of accused No.1 with Anitha Rani.
49. Pw-4 Priyadarshini Patil has stated in her evidence that on 30.3.2004 Kirti called her and informed her that accused No.1 was having an affair with another lady by name Anitha Rani. Further, she has stated that on 31.3.2004 her another sister Pragnya called her and informed that Kirti told her that accused No.1 married another lady by name Anitha Rani and got a daughter 32 SC No.538/2004 from her and she wanted to verify the said fact by going to the house of Anitha Rani. In her cross-examination she has stated that she has not stated the above aspects in detail. But she has stated the same briefly before the police and before the Magistrate.
50. Pw-5 Sheela Patil has stated in her evidence that her daughter Kirti informed her that accused No.1 was having relationship with one Anitha Rani and she was going to enquire the said Anitha Rani on 3.4.2004.
51. Pw-13 Pragnya has stated that on 31.3.2004 Kirti called her and informed that accused No.1 was having an affair with another lady by name Anitha Rani and she came to know about the same as a lady used to call her husband when they were in M.S.R.Nagar through phone regularly and the said lady informed Kirti that accused No.1 was cheating her. Pw-13 has further stated that after shifting to Dollar's Residency, accused No.1 was going to night duty and he used to keep his mobile phone switched off. One day Kirti had visited the said hospital and waited for accused No.1 near the gate, but accused No.1 did not come out of the gate and thereafter, she came back to her house. When Kirti enquired regarding the same with accused No.1, he did not give satisfactory 33 SC No.538/2004 answer. It was also informed by Kirti that one lady used to call and enquire about accused No.1 and when Kirti asked her about her identity, she informed that she was the wife of accused No.1. Kirti also informed that accused No.1 used to talk to said lady in Kannada on her enquiry regarding phone number of said lady, she came to know that it was the phone number of old house of accused No.1. When Kirti enquired regarding the same with accused No.1, he did not give satisfactory answer. Kirti told Pw-13 that she would trace said Anitha Rani with the help of her colleague. It is the evidence of Pw-13 that on 1.4.2004 again Kirti called her and informed that she would meet Anitha Rani on 2.4.2004. It is the evidence of Pw-13 that she had informed her the above said information on 31.3.2004 to another sister Priya.
52. In her cross-examination, Pw-13 has stated that she personally does not know about the relationship of accused No.1 with Anitha Rani. She came to know about the same through Kirti.
53. Pw-14 Ravindra Jagatap has stated in his evidence that his wife Pw-13 informed him that Kirti informed her about the affair of accused No.1 with another lady through phone and that Kirti was going to confirm regarding the same on 2nd April. 34
SC No.538/2004
54. Pw-25 Shivaputhrappa, Spl. Taluk Executive Magistrate has stated that at the time of inquest mahazar, he has recorded the statements of mother Smt. Sheela Patil and sister Priyadarshini of deceased. They had stated that recently accused No.1 was having a relationship with another lady and therefore differences arose between them and therefore, accused No.1 might have committed her murder.
55. Pw-28 Rohit has stated in his evidence that Kirti was working with him in Shabari Designs Pvt. Ltd., in the year 2003-04. She had asked to collect the address of the mobile phone number and another land line number. He could find out the address of mobile number, but he could not able to find out the address of landline number. Thereafter, Kirti informed him that she had found out the address of land line number, they have to go to the said address on 3.4.2004 and asked him to accompany her.
56. In his cross-examination Pw-28 has stated that he has not given documents to the police regarding his job. It is his evidence that he has not gone any where with deceased Kirti. Pw -3 has stated in his evidence that Kirthi wanted to go to the place of Anitarani with h er colleuage Kariyappa., But the prosecution has 35 SC No.538/2004 examined Pw-28 Rohit before the court as the person whom she wanted to take along with her while going to the house of Anitarani.
57. It is the allegation against accused No.1 that he was having extra marital relationship with one Anitha Rani. Ex.P-59 is the Passport of Anitha Rani. In it, her spouse name is mentioned as Niranjan Kumar. Accused No.1 is also Niranjan Kumar. But, the prosecution has not produced any evidence to show that the person as mentioned in the pSassport of Anitha Rani as Niranjan kumar is accused No.1. no material collected to whether said Anithat Rani is married or unmarried.
58. It is alleged against accused No.1 that under the guise of night duty, he was visiting the house of Anitha Rani. Ex.P-32 is the copy of document issued by M.S.Ramaiah Medical college. It shows that accused No.1 has completed his I year MBBS. But, he has not completed his final year MBBS. Ex.P-29 is the information regarding the progress report of accused No.1 issued from M.S.Ramaiah Medical college dt: 15.6.2004. It shows that he has completed his I and II year MBBS. But, he has failed in his final year MBBS Part I and in his final year MBBS Part II, he has passed only 36 SC No.538/2004 two subjects. Ex.P-33 is another information regarding night duty issued by M.S.Ramaiah Medical hHspital. It shows that only the students who have passed final year MBBS examination become inturns and they will be posted for night duty on rotation basis; as accused No.1 has not passed his final year MBBS examination, the question of posting him for night duty does not arise and he has not been posted for the night duty. Therefore, it is clear that as the accused no.1 has not completed his MBBS degree, there was no question of he was visiting the hospital for night duty.
59. The question is whether the accused was visiting Anitha Rani under the guise of night duty in M.S.Ramaiah hospital. Anitha Rani is cited as a witness in the charge-sheet as Cw-16. But, she has not been examined by the prosecution. Ofcourse, it would have been difficult for the prosecution to elicit regarding the relationship between her and accused No.1, even if she had been examined before the court. But, in this case prosecution has not examined her before the court. It appears that Cws 17 and 18 were the neighbours who are the persons from the same locality of Cw-13 Anitha Rani. But, they are also not examined before the court. Therefore there is no direct evidence to show that accused No.1 was having extra marital relationship with Cw-16 Anitha Rani 37 SC No.538/2004 and he was visiting her. In the prosecution evidence, it has been stated that accused No.1 was also having relationship with one Asha Rose D'souza. She has been cited as Cw-19. She is also not examined before the court and any other witness also examined to prove his relationship with one Asha Rose D'souza.
60. Ex.P-9 and 10 are the two dairies of deceased Kirti. Those dairies were subjected to scientific examination and the expert has given his opinion stating that the hand writing in those dairies are that of deceased Kirti. In those dairies there is some reference to some calls by a lady to her husband. But, there is nothing to show that those were the calls of Anitha Rani. It appears that the prosecution has not made efforts to find out as to from which number those telephone calls were received and to whom those telephone numbers belonged.
61. Pw-1 has stated in his evidence that he has lodged complaint as per Ex. P-25 on a suspicion that the murder might have been committed for the reason that accused No.1 was having extra marital relationship with another lady. But, it is his evidence that he has not enquired and collected information regarding accused No.1 having relationship with another lady. 38
SC No.538/2004
62. Since from the very beginning, i.e., from lodging the comjplaint as per Ex.P-25 by Pw-1, it has been consistently stated that accused No.1 was having a relationship with another lady and it is the reason for commiting the murder of deceased Kirti. The dairies of deceased Kirti shows that accused No.1 used to get call from a lady regularly, accused No.1 was going out of the house during night saying that he was having night duty. It appears from the dairies that the deceased Kirti was quite depressed with the attitude of the accused No.1. The documents from M.S. Ramaiah Medical College show that accused No.1 has not completed his MBBS and therefore there was no question of he was going for night duty to the hospital. The diaries as well as other evidence of the prosecution witnesses clearly shows that he was going out of the house in the night stating that he was going for night duty. Deceased Kirthi had informed regarding the same to her sisters as well as the mother. When there was no night duty for the accused No.1 his going out of the house in the night will definitely create doubt. In the Passport of Anitha Rani the name of her spouse is mentioned as Niranjan Kumar. It is also a strong reason to suspect the relationship of accused No.1 with Anitha Rani. But, only on the basis of doubt or suspicion the case of prosecution cannot be 39 SC No.538/2004 proved. The prosecution ought to have proved the relationship of accused No.1 with Anitha Rani with cogent evidence. One of the witness says that accused No.1 has a daughter from said Anitha Rani. But the prosecution has not found that said Anitha Rani has a daughter from accused No.1. The prosecution could have proved that the said daughter was indeed the daughter of accused No.1. It would have thrown light regarding the relationship of accused No.1 with Anitha Rani.
63. After completion of arguments of both sides, the prosecution filed an application U/sec. 294 of Cr.P.C. calling upon the accused persons either admit or deny the documents produced by them. Certified copies of documents in RCC No. 219/2007 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate First class (Court No. 10), Dhule, including charge and deposition. The said application was allowed by this court by the order dt: 20.2.2023. On 6.3.2023, the counsel for the accused No.1 to 3 filed memo stating that the accused No.1 to 3 admits the filing of the case in RCC No. 219/2007 before the learned JMFC, Dhule, Maharastra State for the offences punishable U/sec. 420, 494, 120-B R/w. Sec. 34 of IPC and it is pending. But, they did not admit the contents of any of the documents placed before the court.
40
SC No.538/2004
64. The above documents including the evidence of Pw-3 herein and the charge framed in that case against accused No.1 to 3 herein in RCC No. 219/2007 before the court of Magistrate at Dhule, in it, one of the charge is that accused No.1 had a wife by name Anitha Rani and by suppressing the said fact he married Kirti the daughter of Pw-3 herein, during the subsistence of his marriage with said Anitha Rani. Though the accused No.1 has admitted those documents, he has not admitted the contents of those documents. Production of those documents will not prove the relationship of accused No.1 with Anitha Rani. The evidence produced by prosecution is not sufficient to prove the relationship of accused No.1 with Anitha Rani. Accordingly, I answer point No.5 in the Negative.
65. Point No.7, 8 and 9:- Ex. P-25 is the complaint lodged by Pw-1 to police Inspector Sanjaynagar police station on 3.4.2004. On the basis of the same the police have registered UDR No. 10/2004 on the same day at 10.15 a.m. In the said complaint, it has been stated that accused No.1 reported to have extra marital relationship with one woman and in respect of the same there used to be quarrels between accused No.1 and deceased Kirti and he 41 SC No.538/2004 suspects some foul play in the sudden and unexpected death of Kirti.
66. Pw-1 has stated in his evidence that after coming to know about the death of Kirti, he along with mother of deceased Kirti-Smt. Sheela Patil and Anikesh came to Bengaluru in a flight and reached Bengaluru at 7.30 p.m. on 3.4.2004. When they came to M.S.Ramaiah Hospital, the dead body of Kirti was in the cold storage. On seeing the dead body, he found contusion(Bhavu) over her nose, lips and on both hands. He has shown those injuries to the police Inspector who was present in the hospital. He has stated that accused No.2 was present in the said place and told that those injuries caused while keeping the dead body in cold storage.
67. In his cross-examination Pw-1 has stated that on seeing those injuries he suspected that it might be a murder. Immediately on seeing the injuries and on hearing about the incident that has taken place in the house of deceased from Pw-5, he gave complaint as per Ex.P-25. However, the alleged injuries found on the dead body are not mentioned in Ex.P-25 complaint. Pw-1 has stated that there was no necessity to mention the injuries on the dead body in Ex.P-25. It is to be noted that Pw-1 was a Retd. Inspector General of 42 SC No.538/2004 Police of Maharastra state. He must be aware of the importance of mentioning those injuries in the said complaint. Particularly when it is his evidence that he has lodged complaint as per Ex. P-25 immediately after seeing those injuries. The reason given by Pw-1 for not mentioning those injuries in Ex. P-25 complaint is that on seeing the dead body he felt very sad and therefore he could not write all the information in Ex. P-25. It can be accepted that on seeing the dead body Pw-1 got upset. However, he is not a layman. He was a retired IGP and therefore the possibility of missing out in mentioning about the important aspect of injuries found on the dead body does not appear to be probable.
68. Pw-3 is the father of deceased Kirti. He has stated in his evidence that on 3.4.2004 at 3.30 a.m., he was in Chalisgoan. His eldest son Avinash Patil informed him that something bad happened to Kirti and asked to start immediately to Aurangabad. While he was proceeding to Aurangabad again he contacted Avinash Patil in his mobile phone and at that time Avinash Patil informed Pw-3 that his daughter Kirti is no more and it appears that her husband i.e., accused No.1 might have done something to her. Further, he has stated that after reaching Aurangabad his daughter Priya Patil told him that the dead body was taken to 43 SC No.538/2004 M.S.Ramaiah Hospital, Bengaluru, as per the information received from accused No.1. Then he got more suspicious towards accused No.1 and contacted Bengaluru City Police Commissioner Mr. Mariswamy and requested him to shift the dead body from M.S.Ramaiah Hospital to a Government Hospital as accused No.1 was a student of M.S. Ramaiah Medical college for which the said hospital was attached.
69. Pw-3 was the father of the deceased Kirti, is a politician and he was a member of parliament and he was a Minister in Central Government. Further, he has stated that he was also an Advocate. Therefore, it appears that Pw-3 is a powerful person and he has got in touch with the Commissioner of Police immediately. Under the circumstances, whether accused No.1 would influence the doctors at M.S.Ramaiah hospital only on his capacity that he was an old student of the college attached to it, that too when he has not completed his MBBS course and he was no way connected to the said college at the time of alleged incident.
70. Pw-3 has further stated in his evidence that when he enquired his wife, she told him that accused No.1 was giving different versions, once he said that Kirti committed suicide and another time he said that she fell sick and died. She also informed 44 SC No.538/2004 him that when she asked about the injuries on the dead body of Kirti, the accused No.1 told her that she fell from the bed and sustained injuries. Pw-3 has stated that the Taluk Executive Magistrate asked his wife to give statement and asked him to give complaint and accordingly he has given written complaint to the Taluk Executive Magistrate as per Ex. P-3. He has stated that he lodged complaint as per Ex. P-3 alleging continuous demand of money by accused No. 1 to 3 and extra marital relationship of accused No.1 with Anitha Rani and to prevent the deceased Kirti to go the house of Anitha Rani to find out the truth.
71. It is the evidence of Pw-3 that after completing the post mortem examination, they took the dead body to Mumbai and they reached their house at 7.45 or 8.00 p.m., on 3.4.2004. When they opened the face of dead body for the last darshan to their relatives, they found swelling on the nose and eyes, his wife told him that there were wound marks on hands. Therefore, after discussion with relatives they decided to have second post mortem examination at Mumbai and accordingly with the help of Mumbai Worli police, the dead body was taken to JJ Hospital, Mumbai and second post mortem examination was conducted on 4.4.2004 at 10 a.m. He came to know that the vital parts of the dead body i.e., 45 SC No.538/2004 both lungs, both kidneys, heart including trachea were removed at the time of first post mortem examination and cotton was stuffed inside the body. The doctors at J.J. Hospital collected small parts of the body. Thereafter, dead body was handed over to them and they performed last rituals in the evening on 4.4.2004 at Worli crematorium. The accused No. 1 to 3 did not attend the said ceremonies.
72. Pw-3 has stated that after 2-3 days, he came to Bengaluru to collect the belongings of Kirti, he requested the investigating officer to find out the last mobile call of his daugher Kirti. Further he has stated that while he was in Bengaluru, he got a surprise information that accused No.1 though in the police custody was allowed to go to his home for sleep and one constable was posted to guard him. He came across the information that while accused No.1 was in Jail, he was making calls through his mobile phone to his uncle at Chittoor. Pw-3 got the said information through Mobile phone company in Mumbai as he had easy access on account of his position as a former minister of Telecommunication. His relative Milind Patil also got information that accused No.1 was withdrawing huge money of Rs.10 lakhs and 20 lakhs while he was in jail from ICICI Bank.
46
SC No.538/2004
73. But, it appears that there is no evidence to prove the above said evidence of Pw-3. When Pw-3 was in touch with police commissioner of Bengaluru city and also police inspector of Sanjay nagar police station, it is difficult to believe that accused No.1 was allowed to go to his house to sleep with an escort of a police constable. Further though Pw-3 has stated that he has got information from mobile company regarding the calls made by accused No.1 and also regarding withdrawing of Rs. 10 lakhs and 20 lakhs from ICICI Bank while he was in jail. It appears that the police have not collected any evidence to prove these facts which Pw-3 has stated in his evidence.
74. Pw-3 has further stated in his evidence that his daughter Kirti was an Athlete and he was a head girl in the school and had a strong mind and she was an architect by profession. Such being the case, she won't commit suicide and she was done away to prevent the truth of relationship between the accused No.1 and Anitha Rani coming out and also for the dowry.
75. In his cross-examination, Pw-3 has stated that he does not remember whether he has stated before the investigating officer that his wife informed him that accused No.1 was giving 47 SC No.538/2004 different answers when asked him about the reasons for death of Kirti and when he was asked about the injuries on the dead body of Kirti, accused No.1 told that she fell from bed and sustained injuries. Further, he has stated that he does not remember whether he has stated before the I.O. that on account of continuous demand for money by accused No.1 to 3, due to the relationship of accused No.1 with Anitha Rani and that Kirti wanted to find out their relationship by going to the house of Anitha Rani, she might have been killed. Further, he has stated that he does not remember whether he has stated before the I.O. regarding swelling on the nose and eyes, he found on the face of the dead body when face was opened for last darshan to their relatives in their house at Mumbai.
76. Pw-43 K. Purushothama was the police inspector of Sanjay nagar police station, who was the investigating officer of the case before transferring the case to CID. He has stated in his evidence that Pw-3 has not stated before him regarding different answers given by accused No.1 as the reason for death of Kirti and reason for sustaining injuries. Further, Pw-43 has stated in his evidence that Pw-3 has not stated before him that on 30.3.2004 and 31.3.2004, there was big quarrel between accused No.1 and 48 SC No.538/2004 Kirti in respect of money and Anitha Rani and on 2.4.2004, Kirti decided to go to the house of Anitha Rani and on 3.4.2004 she wanted to go to the place of Anitha Rani with her colleague Kariayappa and for the above reasons his daughter was done away with.
77. Pw-44 Ganapathi M.K. is another investigating officer. He was the Police inspector of COD. He has deposed his chief examination, but he could not be cross-examined in view of his death. Therefore accused No.1 lost his valuable right of cross- examination of the I.O. by putting the omissions and contradictions in the evidence of witnesses. It cannot be denied that due to the non-examination of Pw-44, case of the accused prejudiced.
78. Pw-4 Priyadharshini Patil has stated in her evidence that on 3.4.2004 at about 2.45 a.m., she came to know about the death of Kirti. Immediately she called up her husband accused No.1 to know what happened to Kirti. But, accused No.1 was not telling the clear picture. Once he had said that they had gone to a movie, then Kirti was feeling dizzy and then he got her home. She vomited blood, he kept her in a room and watching T.V. in another room, when he returned to the bed room, Kirti was heavy. Thereafter, accused No.1 took her to the hospital. In the hospital, his uncle and 49 SC No.538/2004 Doctor were present. She asked for phone number of doctor and she talked to the doctor, who told that Kirti was brought dead to the hospital. Doctor gave her the phone number of Supervisor, he gave the phone number of Dr.Gopalappa. When she called Dr. Gopalappa, she got suspicion that Kirti was killed by her husband and requested Dr. Gopalappa not to allow the accused No.1 and police to touch the body, till some one from their side comes to the hospital and asked him not to proceed for post mortem examination. Thereafter, she collected the mobile number of chairman of the hospital and called him in the early morning and requested him to keep the dead body of Kirti in a proper place. Meanwhile her husband Avinash Patil called her father and informed the incident. Her father, her husband and herself and brother in law Milind Patil came to Bengaluru by flight at about 11.30 a.m. on 3.4.2004. They came to know that the dead body was shifted to Bowring Hospital. They reached Bowring Hospital at 11.45 a.m. At that time, dead body was already taken for post mortem examination and one Magistrate was also present in the hospital. Her mother informed her that accused No.1 told that Kirti had committed suicide. After sometime the body of Kirti brought out of post mortem examination room , then she saw the nose and 50 SC No.538/2004 mouth of Kirti, which was red and they were not in a position to tell anything.
79. Pw-4 in her cross-examination has stated that she has not stated the facts which she has stated in her chief examination before the I.O. or before the Magistrate.
80. Pw-5 Smt. Sheela Patil has stated that they reached M.S.Ramaiah Hospital at 8.30 p.m., on 3.4.2004. In the cold storage they saw the dead body of Kirti. She found redness on her nose and marks on the upper lip. Further, there were finger markers on her nose. She shown the same to Pw-1 Gavande.
81. It is her evidence that when she enquired accused No.1, he informed her that she has committed suicide. Thereafter, again he has stated that she died due to sickness. When she asked him as to why he could not take her to the hospital or bring a doctor to house itself, he did not answer the same. When she asked accused No.1 as to how she sustained injuries on her nose, lips and hands, accused No.1 told that she sustained injuries due to fall from the cot. Therefore, it is her evidence that accused No.1 was giving different versions.
51
SC No.538/2004
82. Pw-5 has stated that she has given statement before the Magistrate in the hospital. It is her evidence that accused No.1 did not come near dead body and there was no kind of sorrow in his face. In her cross-examination Pw-5 has stated that Kirti was not suffering from any disease and she was healthy. In the cross- examination when she was questioned whether she has stated the above said facts either before the I.O. or before the Magistrate, she has stated that she has not stated the details.
83. Pw-25 Shivaputhrappa, Spl. Executive Magistrate has stated in his evidence that Pw-3 and 4 have not stated before him as discussed above in their evidence.
84. Ex. P-39 is the inquest report conducted by Cw-25 P.S. Shivaputrappa, Spl. Executive Magistrate, Bengaluru North Taluk. He has stated in his evidence that on 3.4.2004 he received requisition from Sanjaynagar police station to conduct inquest panchanama on the dead body of Kirti. Accordingly, he visited the Mortuary of Bowring hospital and conducted inquest panchanama in the presence of panch witnesses and relatives. He recorded the statements of Pw-4 Priyadarshini and Pw-5 Sheela Patil. They have stated that Kirti and accused No.1 were in cordial terms. But they 52 SC No.538/2004 had expressed their suspicion that as there was some difference of opinion between Kirti and her husband, her husband might have committed her murder. He has identified the inquest panchanama as per Ex. P-39 and his signatures as per Ex. P.39 (a&b).
85. Pw-25 has been cross-examined by the accused persons. He has stated in his evidence that he closely observed the dead body and he has not found any injuries on the dead body. In column No. 12, he has mentioned that it has not come to his notice that the death was due to any cruelty. He has given such opinion in Column No. 12 on the basis of the statements of witnesses and relatives of the deceased. After the inquest panchanama, he has sent the dead body for post mortem examination at 2 p.m. and he has noted that the post mortem has to be conducted by 2 doctors. He has reiterated that he has mentioned in Ex. P-52 that he has found no injuries over the dead body. He has stated in his evidence that Pws- 3, 4 and 5 have not given statements as stated by them in their evidence.
86. Ex. P-39 is the inquest Mahazar. It is stated in column No. 7 that there was no injury marks on the dead body. In column No.9 it has been stated that father, mother and sister of the deceased 53 SC No.538/2004 identified the dead body and he has recorded their statements separately. In column No. 12, it is stated nothing was found to show that the death was due to cruelty.
87. Ex. P-53 is a letter by Pw-25 to the PSI, Sanjaynagar Police station, wherein it is stated that during inquest on the dead body of Kirti, he has recorded the statements of her father, mother and sister and their statements primafacie disclose that her husband accused No.1 was responsible for the death of Kirti and therefore, necessary legal action may be taken against him.
88. Ex. P-3 is the complaint filed by Pw-3 before the Spl. Executive Magistrate on 3.4.2004,. In it, he has stated regarding the demand of dowry by the accused, his relationship with one Anitha Rani and therefore he suspects that Kirti was murdered by accused No.1. In this complaint nothing has been stated about the injuries found on the dead body. More over, though this complaint was given to the Spl. Executive Magistrate on 3.4.2004 during the inquest which was conducted in between 12 noon to 2 p.m., the said complaint was received by the Sanjay nagar police on 5.4.2004 at 4.30 p.m. and on the basis of the same a case was registered in Cr. No. 162/2004. If really the said complaint was received by the 54 SC No.538/2004 Spl. Executive Magistrate on 3.4.2004 alleging murder of Kirti by accused No.1, the Special Executive Magistrate ought to have been sent the complaint immediately to the concerned police. But, it took more than 48 hours to send the said complaint to the police or for the police to register a case on the basis of the said complaint. As already stated Pw-1 was a former IGP, Maharastra State and Pw-3 is a politician, a former Minister of Central Government, both knew top brass of Bengaluru police. There is evidence to show that they were in touch with Bengaluru police in early hours of 3.4.2004. It is difficult to accept that the complaint given by Pw-3 to the Spl. Executive Magistrate takes 2 days to reach the concerned police. Absolutely there is no explanation either from the Spl. Executive Magistrate or by the police or by the prosecution as to why there was delay in receiving the complaint in the police station. Strangely as already stated even in this complaint there is no mention about the injuries said to have been found on the dead body of Kirti.
89. Ex. P-25 is a complaint of Pw-1 to the Sanjay nagar police, on the basis of which UDR No. 10/2004 was registered. In it, it has been stated regarding extra marital relationship of accused No.1 55 SC No.538/2004 with a woman. In it there is no allegation of dowry demand or injuries found on the dead body.
90. Pw-27 Dr. Bheemappa Havanur, the Doctor who has conducted post mortem examination on the dead body of Kirti. He has stated in his evidence that on 3.4.2004 at 12.15 p.m., he received a requisition from Spl. Executive Magistrate to conduct he post mortem examination on the dead body of Smt. Kirti. Accordingly, on the same day between 12.50 p.m. to 1.50 p.m., he has conducted P.M. examination. He found following two external injuries on the dead body;
1) There is a contusion on the outer aspect of left elbow measuring 6x3 Cms. In the middle of the contusion there is a vertical linear scratch abrasion measuring 4x0.1 cms.
2) Contusion present on the right side on th eneck below the thyroid measuring 8x4 cms.
91. Further he has stated that both lungs appear edematous and congested. Cut section exudes dark blood fine froth. On dissection of neck there is extravasation of blood on the right side of neck below the thyroid cartilage 9cmsx4cms in to the sub- contaneous tissues and the mussels of the neck. Thyroid bone and thyroid cartilage are intact.
56
SC No.538/2004
92. He has stated that he has got marked post mortem report as Ex. P.43. In Ex. P-43 the portion where second external injury is noted is torn and cut and therefore second injury cannot be seen in Ex. P-43. However, injury found on dissection of neck could be seen on the 3rd page. Pw-27 has further stated in his chief examination in page 4 and 5 as under:-
The Manifestation of asphyxia are:
1. Congestion of the face. 2. Sub-conjunctival hemorrhage.
3. Petechiae on the lungs. 4. Petechiae on the surface of the brain. 5. Fluid blood in the right chambers of the heart.
6. Generalized all the organs are congested.
The majority of manifestation are asphyxia: as shown in the post mortem report. All findings are given in Post mortem. Causes for asphyxia are:
1. Hanging, 2. Chocking, 3. Smothering, 4. Manual compression over the neck, 5. Drowning.
Throttling is compression of the neck.
There is a contusion in the right side of neck measuring 9x4 cms, could also be caused asphyxia in this case. Throttling is always homicidal. Injury on head and neck collectively as found by me cannot be caused by mere fall. Bleeding is on the right side of the neck and in the left side of the brain. My finding on the liver spleen and kidneys being intact do not suggest the presence of any dicease.
57
SC No.538/2004 I am not competent to enough to say whether the level of rofecoxib(Anti- inflamatory drug- non steriodal) is beyond toxic level.
I would not suggest that on the basis of my opinion in the post mortem report and the findings of the FSL in their opinion and the histopathology report indicates the death due to drug rofecoxib.
93. In his cross-examination in page 6 and 7, it is stated as under:-
" I did not find the petechiae (small dotted bleeding) on the surface of heart, lungs and the brain of the deceased. i did not find the cyanosis (turning of the body into bluish due to lack of oxygen) on the body of the deceased. I did not find the dark fluid blood in the right chambers of the heart of the deceased. I agree that the above said signs are most essential for causing the asphyxial death. The above stated signs do not find place in Ex.P.43 PMR. Since, I did not see the injury marks on the lips and nose of dead body of the deceased, they are not mentioned in Ex.P.43. Similarly, no nail marks over the neck of the deceased were found.
By virtue of the above signs which could not be found on the dead body of the deceased there were no chances of smothering and throttling.
I did not find any injury on the scalp tissues (outer portion of the skull). Similarly, I did not see any injury on the skull also.58
SC No.538/2004 I did not see any injury on the Duramater (outer layer of the brain). Similarly I did not find any collection of the blood on the surface of the brain or inside the brain.
In view of the above circumstances there are no chances of causing the traumatic injuries to the brain. There was no swelling over the neck of the deceased. Generally if the blunt object comes in contact with the body with forcefully then there are every chances of swelling thereat but in certain exceptional cases such as wherever there is a loose skin without stiffness adhered with the internal muscles, no such swelling takes place. Generally loose skin will be in only in the aged persons. But it is not necessary only in aged persons but also in the other young aged persons also.
It is true that, I have not sent the contused area for the Histo-chemical Enzyme Test. It is not true to suggest that, since I have not sent the contused area for Histo-chemical Enzyme Test, I am not sure that, the said injuries caused to the deceased are ante-mortem."
94. In respect of rofecoxib drug, Pw-27 has stated that examinations do not indicate that death was due to the said drug. However, he has stated that the said drug was banned subsequent to the post mortem examination.
95. He has also stated that consumption of said drug will have side effects such as Ventricular depression, renal effects, hepatic effects, intra cranial bleeding etc., 59 SC No.538/2004
96. He has stated that deceased was taking said drugs as per the prescription and the said drug was banned subsequent to the death of deceased. In view of the above evidence, it cannot be said that the said drug was the cause for death of deceased Kirti.
97. Pw-27 has stated that as per the post mortem report and Histopathological report one can easily say that death of the deceased was not due to hanging or strangulation. Pw-27 admitted that as per post mortem report and Histopathological report, it is not a case of suicidal death.
98. Pw-27 has stated in his evidence in page No. 10 and 11 as under:-
" Witness volunteers at this stage that, earlier the said Rofecoxib drug was banned in the month of June 2004 in USA and around in the month of December 2004 it is was banned in India, which was not known to me, before which lack of knowledge basing on the conclusion over the neck which would cause the tearing of the blood vessels in the left side of the brain and therefore, I have given the opinion in the Pm report Ex.P.43 accordingly as the death was due to cardio respiratory failure as a result of Sub-Arachnoid hamarage but later on I have come to know regarding the ban of the said drug, the cause of death remains the same but even the death could have caused because of atrophy 60 SC No.538/2004 of the liver and the chronic use of Non Steroidal Anti Inflammatory Drugs."
99. After cross-examination by the accused, Pw-27 was recalled and permitted to cross-examine him by the prosecution. During his cross-examination by the prosecution, he has admitted that he has given his opinion that the death was due to cardio- respiratory failure as a result of sub-arachnoid hemorrhage consequent upon injury to the neck and head. He has admitted that for extravasation(brain hemorrhage) of brain there need not be external injury to the skull, scalp and duramater.
100. In page No. 14 and 15 of his evidence Pw-27 has stated as under:
"Since the lungs of the deceased were edematous i.e.,, filled with blood and fluid which was being seen because of failure of pumping mechanism of the heart, I have mentioned in the Ex.P.47 as death due to cardio-respiratory failure.
Since there is a finding of the pathologist in his report as per Ex.P.41(histo-pathological report) that, section studied show a large area of hemorrhage over the frontal cortex and in the underlying substance of the brain along with congestion edema, relying on the same, and in view of sustainance of injury to the neck which causes sudden change of position of the head on to the right side 61 SC No.538/2004 stretching the blood vessels on the left-side resulting in bleeding from tearing of lenticulo striate vessels, I have given the cause of death as due to cardio-respiratory failure as a result of sub-arachniod hemorrhage consequent upon injury to the neck and head.
If it is asked me that on what basis I have stated in my cross-examination dt: 11.12.2015 that the injuries around the neck of the deceased shown in Ex.P.43 are not sufficient to cause the death and further admitted that the said neck injuries shown in Ex.P.43 are trivial and not fatal in nature, in the light of my specific opinion at page no.4 of Ex.P.47, I say that, because of appearance of the injury on the neck, I have mentioned there are likeliness of causing the cardio-respiratory failure as stated there-in but, they were not only the cause of death and therefore, I have stated in my cross examination accordingly."
101. Pw-27 has admitted that only on the single reading in the prescription dt: 15.12.2003, he has concluded B.P. of deceased that was 80/60. In his further cross-examination he has stated that usually they do not rely on single reading in such prescription and he cannot come to the conclusion that there was low B.P. in the absence of any other document. The evidence of Pw-27 shows that one reading of low B.P. is 80/60 is not a conclusive proof to show that the deceased was having low B.P. 62 SC No.538/2004
102. In Page No. 19, Pw-27 has stated as under:-
" Basing on the information given by the I.O. with respect to the deceased consuming multiple varities of Non- Steroidal Ante-Inflammatory Drugs and Rofecoxib; as well as the presence of Rofecoxib as detected by FSL as per Ex.P66 and 67, I have stated conclusively the death of the deceased as occurred due to the complications of prolonged consumption of Non-Steroidal Ante Inflammatory Drugs and Rofecoxib."
103. But, he has stated that the prolonged consumption of said drug by the deceased was not mentioned in the informative documents sent by the investigating officer. He has stated that he has given a final opinion as per Ex. P-47 after the receipt of information from the I.O. including his letter dt:9.6.2004.
104. Pw-27 has stated in his evidence in page 9 and 10 as under:-
"If a patient habituated with the drugs which are suggested herein above and suffering from low BP, he/she will suffer from Pulmonary Edema due to the failure in the pumping of the heart. Combined effect of the same, results into cardio- respiratory failure, which ultimately results in death. It is true that, I have noticed Pulmonary Edema and mentioned 63 SC No.538/2004 in the post-mortem as per Ex.P-43. Pulmonary Edema also finds place in Histo-Pathology report which is marked as per Ex.P.41. It is also true that, in Ex.P.41 it is shown the hemorrhage in the left lung. It is true that, such hemorrhage in left lung with Pulmonary Edema causes the death."
105. Further Pw-27 has stated in page 16, 17 and 18 as under:
"I was well aware much prior to giving my final opinion on cause of death, that the BP of the deceased was 80/60.
There is no other prescription regarding the BP of the deceased Kirti having recorded, except the prescription dated 15.12.2003.
It is true that, only on the single reading of the said prescription dt: 15.12.2003, I have concluded that the BP of deceased was 80/60.
It is true that, as per my experience, I was aware of the severe complication of the low BP such as circulatory Failure, Pulmonary Edema, Dizziness, at the time of giving my final opinion regarding the cause of death as per Ex.P.47.
I have not mentioned regarding the low BP to the deceased in my final opinion of cause of death, but I have noted regarding Pulmonary Edema in the Post Mortem 64 SC No.538/2004 Report which was already mentioned in Histopathology report.
Pulmonary Edema may be because of failure of pumping of blood which may cause the low BP also.
It is not true to suggest that Pulmonary Edema, Congestion, and frothy blood are also the indignations of Asphyxia.
From 10 Minutes to 3 days a person may survive which is based on the quality of treatment to him in case if he is suffering from the complications of low BP. Further witness volunteers that if treated properly he may survive number of years.
If there is continuous low BP for continuing 3 days, certainly complications appear immediately.
There is no mentioning in respect of either the low BP and its complications in the prescription dated 04.03.2012 and also the medication prescribed there in and also indicated the said low BP and its complications.
It is true that, the other Five prescriptions are also similar to the prescription dated 04.03.2012, without mentioning of any low BP or its complications except the prescriptions dated 15.12.2003.
If it is suggested to me that only on single reading of the said prescription dated 15.12.2003 it cannot be concluded that deceased was suffering from low BP, I say that at that particular point of time in the absence of 65 SC No.538/2004 sufficient Medical documentaries I felt that she was suffering from low BP and usually we do not the rely single reading of such prescriptions dated 15.12.2003.
It is true that, I could not come to the conclusion to say that there was low BP, in the absence of other document."
106. Further in page No.19, he has stated as under:-
"It is true that, Pulmonary Edema can be both acute and sudden as well as chronic and gradual.
It is true that, Pulmonary Edema causes congesting heart failure and vice-versa.
It is true that, Pulmonary Edema could be Cardio-Genic or non Cardio-Genic.
It is true that, congestive heart failure causes Pulmonary Edema.
It is true that, congestive heart failure will be caused by Coronary Artery Disease, Cardio-Myopathy, heart wall defect and high B.P. Witness volunteers that in addition to the same other causes are also, such as Hypoxia of the brain causes the congestive heart failure."
107. Pw-26 Dr. M. Sudha Rao has given Histo pathology reports as per Ex. P-41 and 42 and her impression was that 66 SC No.538/2004 Cerebral Hemorrhage with possibly edema and ischemia of Cerebellar tonsil region. Hemorrhagic edema of the lung-shock lung. Acute tubular necrosis of kidney with severe medullary conjestion-shock kidney. Hemorrhage into strap muscle of neck strapmuscle. Liver atrophy? Mal nutrition. In Ex. P-42 it has been stated that hemorrhage appears to be fresh within 24 hours.
108. Pw-26 Dr. Sudha rao has stated in her evidence as under:-
" On 3.4.2004, at about 1.30 p.m., I received requisition from Professor of Forensic medicine, the following organs for histopythological examination from MLC No. 10/04. Post Mortem No. 247/04. The specimen sent, No.1. Heart dissected, No.2 Brain, No.3 Half of each lung. No.4 Half of liver, No.5. Half of Right and left kidney, No.6 Spleen, No.7 Tongue and neck structures with extravasation of blood in the right side neck muscles 10/4 cms area. After examination Microscopic report issued is self explanatory. In my report Ex.P-41 and signature is Ex.P41a. Opinion: The impression cerebral hemorrhage with edema and ischeia of cerebral tonsil region. Hemorrhage edema of lung- shock lung syndrome. Acute tubular necrosis of kidney-Shock kidney. Hemorrhage into strap muscle of neck, liver atrophy? Mal nutrition.67
SC No.538/2004 Later, received a letter of forensic medicine requesting the known(opinion) of the hemorrhage in the brain. Then, I issued my opinion dt: 22.6.2004 as fresh hemorrhage within 24 hours. Same is marked as Ex. P-42 and my signature Ex.P-42.a. Ex. P-41 bears my own hand writing. ....
1. There is sub arachnoid hemorrhage on the surface of the brain.
2. There is swelling oblique edema in the brain substance.
3. There is loss of purkinje cells in the cerebellum.
1. These are the indication to show there is the reduced oxygen supply to the brain.
2. The lung contains a homeric fluid within the air spaces. Preventing absorption of oxygen.
3. In the kidney also shows evidence of damage to the tubular system. Which is the first structure to be damaged when there is shortage of oxygen supply in the blood This is described by term shock and multi organ failure. The above findings can be described by the term shock and multi organ failure.
Shock is the state where is a failure of oxygen reaching the various tissues of the body. Characterized in the fall in blood pressure.
Causes for shock can be heart failure peripheral vascular dilatation. Secondly, neurogenic, thirdly traumatic, fourthly septic. In this case it is likely to be trauma followed by neurogenic shock.68
SC No.538/2004 Gross-examination is the necked eye examination of the tissue oblique organ submitted for histopathological examination prior to microscopy. The pallor of the brain is caused by accumulation of fluid which can arise as a result of any type of injury to the brain including trauma. Other types injury could be infection, brain tumor, poisoning etc., Once an organ is subjected to histopathological examination, small pieces of the tissue are processed through various chemicals very thin sections or cut by a special instrument called microlome and mounted on the glass slide for examination under the microscopy. This is called a microscopic section. Brain having conjetion means there is a accumulation of blood within the blood vessels. Edema means accumulation of fluid within the tissue. It can result from congetion. Congestion foul result from compression the blood vessels supplying on any organ. The blood vessels supplying the brain could have been compressed by No.1 sub arachnoid hemorrhage or by the trauma. "
109. The above evidence of Pw-26 is in respect of her reports as per Ex. P-41 and 42. The learned Spl. P.P. has elicited regarding asphyxia in her chief-examination. However, later Pw-26 stated that she has not stated anything about asphyxia and its causes, in her report and therefore her evidence regarding the same may be struck of. The evidence of Pw-26 regarding asphyxia and its causes has not taken in to consideration. But her evidence regarding her report as per Ex. P-41 and P-42, explanation 69 SC No.538/2004 regarding her report as per Ex. P-41 and P-42 elicited by the prosecution can be considered. There is no cross-examination by the accused in respect of the said evidence of Pw-26 and report as per Ex. P-41 and 42.
110. Pw-38 E. G. Nayak was the Asst. Director of FSL, Bengaluru. He has given report as per Ex. P-66. In his report he has stated that the portions of lever, small intestine, kidneys and blood of deceased Kirti sent in 3 bottles were examined by him and he has not find any poisonous content in it. Further, he has stated that a salt solution and a Maaza bottle were sent as bottle No. 4 and 5. In it also there was no poisonous content. It is his evidence that, in bottle No.1 to 3 as stated above, there was Rofecoxib contents of 0.747 micro grams per ml and the said chemical is used as pain killer. He has stated that if Rofecoxib is at a level of O. 747 there is no chance of causing death. Even if though 10-15 fifty mg of Rofecoxib tablets were taken, then also there is no chance of death occuring due to the same. From the evidence of Pw-38 the contention of the defense that the continuous taking of Rofecoxib Tablet has caused the death of deceased Kirti, cannot be believed.
111. As already stated after taking the dead body to Mumbai second post mortem was conducted in J.J. Hopsial. In respect of 70 SC No.538/2004 the second post mortem examination on the dead body, Pw-45 Vijay Vishnu Wase and Pw-46 Dhaneshwar have been examined. Pw-45 has stated in his evidence that on 4.4.2004 he received requisition from the Police inspector Worli police station, Mumbai to conduct post mortem on the dead body of Smt. Kirti Niranjan Kumar. Pursuant to the said request a panel of doctors consisting of himself, B.G. Chigalkar, Dr. B.A. Damavale and Dr. S. Agale conducted post mortem on the dead body in presence of Dr. D.N. Lanjewar on the same day. The first post mortem examination was conducted on the dead body in Bengaluru and the father of the deceased had requested for the re-post mortem examination. The post mortem examination was video graphed.
112. He has stated that they have noted 11 injuries on the dead body. They are as follows:-
1) Abrasion measuring 1.5 cm below right eye, 0.5 X 0.5 cm (orbital region) red in colour.
2) Abrasion over right Ala of nose measuring 0.4 X 0.4 cm red in colour.
3) Abrasion over left Ala of nose measuring 0.4 X 0.4 cm red brown in colour.
4) Punctured wound right Supraclavicula region measuring 0.5 cm X0.3 cm (Post mortem wound probably of embalming).71
SC No.538/2004
5) Circular punctured wound over right lateral lower side of neck measuring 1.5 cm in diameter, circular (Post mortem wound probably of embalming).
6) Redness of Gum over left lateral incisiors of upper jaw, gingial region at the junction of tooth and gums.
7) Purple dicoloiuration over left arm, lower part near elbow measuring 8 cm X 3 cm. On dissection no evidence infiltration of blood at posterio lateral aspect(PM lividity).
8) Bruic over right shoulder measuring 1 cm X 0.5 cm red in colour confirmed on dissection by infiltration of blood.
9) Sutured autopsy wound of 1st PM incision from Symphyses menti to symphyses pubis measuring 68 cm in length, continuous sutured.
10. Sutured autopsy wound of 1st Pm incision over scalp mastoid to left mastoid 38 cm in length.
11. Abrasion over right lateral side of neck measuring 1 cm X 0.5 cm red in colour over middle part.
113. Out of them injury No.4, 5, 7, 9 and 10 were post mortem. He has stated regarding post mortem examination as under:-
"8. There were no fractures found on the dead body. Injury No.4, 5, 9 and 10 are post mortem artefact. Rest of the injuries appears ante mortem injuries. Injury No.7 is post mortem lividity.
9. The opened up scalp skin flap showed few petechial haemarhages on sub cutaneous tissues. These are noted on fronto parietal and occiptal region.72
SC No.538/2004
10. On opining scalp, scalp cavity show presence of gauze pieces and cotton packing.
11. Brain was not present in the skull cavity, only inner matter was present. There was no evidence of superior sagital sinus thrombosis. There was no evidence of pathological disease process.
12. After opening the body cavity through previous incisions cotton soaked in formalin was observed in the neck region, thoracic cavity and abdominal cavity. After opening the 1st PM incision, the thoracic cavity and abdominal cavity did not reveal presence of any organ, lungs, heart, liver, spleen, pancreas, adrenals, aorta, kidneys, oesophagus, stomach, small and large intestine were not found. Structures of neck region including trachea oesophagus, larynx, pharynx, tongue was not found. Larynx, trachea and bronchi were not available for examination. Similarly right lung and left lung pericardium, hear with weight, large vessels were not available for examination.
13. Breast examined from posterior aspect incising through pectroalis muscles. There were no hemorrhages on tumor mass.
14. On examination of abdomen walls peritoneum cavity no free fluid or blood noted. Pelvic fat found in the pelvic cavity of size 8 X 6 X1 cms weight 18 grams kept for chemical analysis. Teeth were intact. Tongue pharynx were not available for examination. Similarly oesophageus, stomach and its contents and small intestine were not 73 SC No.538/2004 available for examination. Examination of large intestine and its contents reveal that rectum 16 cms in length was available in pelvic cavity. On opening lumen of rectum contains 5 to 10 grams of fecal material. Rectal mucosa was normal. There was no Ulceration or hemorrhages. It is preserved for chemical analysis and histopatology. Liver and Gall bladder, pancreas, suprarenal spin with weight, kidneys with weight were not available for examination.
15. The Urinary bladder was present in the pelvic cavity. It was removed and dissected. Mucos membrane is partly autolysed. There was no evidence of any hemorrhages. Ulceration or tumor, mass, slightly yellow coloured urine about 50 cc collected and preserved."
114. After receipt of the Histo-pathology report, they have given their final opinion regarding the cause of death as "death due to Cardio respiratory failure as a result of Sub-arachnoid hemorrhage consequent upon injury to the neck." In his cross- examination he has stated that the name of Dr. D.N. Langeshwar not included in the panel of Doctors. The second post mortem examination will be conducted only in rearest of rare cases. The panel of doctors would conduct post mortem examination only in the case involving NHRC and lockup death and in cases where there is a direction from the Hon'ble High Courts to exhume the deadbody to conduct 2nd post mortem. He has stated that on 74 SC No.538/2004 perusal of external injuries found on the dead body, he could not form any opinion regarding cause of death. Hence, he waited for Histo-pathology report. Even after getting the Histo-pathology report, he could not form any opinion regarding cause of death. He has stated that abrasion will not cause death of a person. He has stated that cause of death was due to cardio respiratory failure. But he has stated that on going through histo pathologic report, they may say that there was injuries found on the head portion of the body. It is his evidence that he did not notice any injury on the head portion of the body. He has also admitted that injury found on the neck was not sufficient to cause death of a person in the normal course. In Ex.P-146 Histo-pathology report there is reference to hemorrhage in between skeleton muscle fibres of sclap, based on the said injury he has not formed an opinion that death was due to said injury. He admits that in the photographs taken at the time of post mortem examination his face is not seen. The said photograph has been marked as Ex. D-1. He has admitted that Ex. P-144 is not in his hand writing.
115. In his further cross-examination, Pw-45 has stated that injury No. 8 mentioned in post mortem report cannot cause the 75 SC No.538/2004 death of a person. He has admitted that it is not a case of Smothering. He has not noticed any contusion over sculp.
116. From the evidence of Pw-45, it appears that in the second post mortem report, the cause of death mentioned in first post mortem report has been reproduced. Pw-45 has clearly stated that the injuries found and mentioned in second P.M. report cannot be cause the death of a person. Further, he has stated that by looking to the external injuries found on the dead body and also even after getting histo-pathology report, he could not form any opinion regarding the cause of death. From the evidence of Pw-45 it can be clearly made out that from second P.M. examination they could not form opinion regarding cause of death and they have only reiterated the cause of death mentioned in the first post mortem report.
117. Pw-46 has stated in his evidence that he was a Professor of pathology in Grant Govt. Medical college, Mumbai. On 6.4.2004 he received a request letter from police inspector Worli police station Mumbai to conduct Histo pathology examination on the tissues collected at the time of post mortem examination conducted on 4.4.2004. There were two bottles. One 76 SC No.538/2004 bottle containing part of rectum, urinary bladder, two pieces of right breast and one piece of left breast and duramater. The second bottle was containing tissues wrapped in a gauze piece, one gauze piece containing skin piece from right ala of nose 1 bit, skin piece of right shoulder 2 bits, left elbow 1 bit, skin below right eye 2 bits along with subcutaneous tissue and scalp skin, right occipital 2 bits and frontal 1 bit. They examined these tissues on 16.4.2004 and the histo-pathology analysis was done on 8.6.2004 by himself and Dr. Shubangini Agale. After examination they have given report as per Ex. P-146.
118. The Histo-pathology report as per Ex. 146 reads as under-
HISTO PATHOLOGY REPORT Pathalogy slide No. 134/04 Tissues bits from: Skin of right ala of nose, skin bit from right shoulder, skin bit from left elbow, skin below right eye, skin of the scalp, part of a rectum, urinary bladder and tissue bits from breast were received for Microscopic evaluation.
Histology from skin obtained from right ala of nose showed few nevus cells along with focal areas of chronic inflammatory cell infiltrate.
77
SC No.538/2004 Skin bit from right shoulder on microscopic examination showed normal epidermis and dermis. The subcutaneous adipose tissue showed extensive area of hemorrhage. Skin bit from left elbow showed increased pigmentation in basal cell layer. The dermis and subcutaneous tissue showed normal features.
Skin bit below right eye showed ulcerated epidermis. The ulcerated area and subepidermal tissue showed inflammatory infiltrate comprising of neutrophils, histiocytes and lymphocytes(Abrasion).
Histology of the skin collected from the scalp showed focal areas of hemorrhage. The hemorrhage were seen in between the skeletal muscle fibres of the scalp. Histology of the dura matter showed normal histological features. The histology of breast, rectum and urinary bladder showed normal histology and did not show any pathological disease process. "
119. Pw-46 has been examined by the advocate. He has stated that he was not a panel number to conduct autopsy on the dead body of deceased Kirti, but, he was present all through post mortem examination. He has stated that he did not affix his signatures on the containers with samples.
120. Ex. P-147 is the original register. In respect of the said original register the cross-examination by accused in Para 16,17,18 and 19 reads as under:-
78
SC No.538/2004 "16. Now I see Ex.P147. In the said register we consider column No.1 to 6 as one page and 7 to 10 as the other page. Accordingly, we have given two page numbers. We follow the same procedure in all cases. Now I see Ex.P147 the entire register. I do not find any other pages where we treated column No.1 to 6 as one page and column No.7 to 10 as the other page. It is true that, early to page No.134 there is no scratch in the pagination. It is true that, page No.135 and No.136 is mentioned and it was also scratched.
It is true that, page No.136 is written on the right hand side and page No.137 is given to next page. It is true that, the details of histopathology of this case mentioned in page No.134 to 137 of Ex.P147 register. It is true that, only for those pages there is a re-pagination and different numbers are given. It is true that, in other case we have given different pagination of page No.139. It is true that, after page No.139 the next page started from page No.136. For one page No.136 is given and to the subsequent pages serial numbers from 135 to 140 given. It is true that, from page No.136 we have given only number to each page upto page No.140.
17. I myself was the custodian of Ex.P147 register. It is true that, I certified that, the entire register contain page No.1 to 150. I have not mentioned same page number to two pages in the register.
18. It is true that, page No.134 of this particular page is in the hand writings of one person and the hand writings in page No.135 are of another. Witness volunteers that, in 79 SC No.538/2004 page No.134 the description will be mentioned by another person and histopathology report will be mentioned by the other. Hence, there are two different hand writings. It is not true to say that the hand writing in page No.135 are different the only ink is different. The bottom portion of page No.134 and whole portion of page No.135 is the running or continuing description of examination. The bottom portion of page No.134 are in the hand writings of Dr. Shubangi Agale. The hand writings in page No.135, I think may also be in her hand writing only. The top portion of page No.136 are in the hand writings of Dr. S. Agale. The 2nd portion of same page are in the hand writings of the same doctor. Similarly, page No.137 is also in her handwriting only. The page No.139 are in the hand writings of Dr. Nayyar Khan. It is true that, from page No.134 to 137 are not in my hand writings, but I was dictating the details. There is no endorsement in the register to the effect that, page No.134 to 137 are written as per my dictation. Witness deposed that, there is no procedure to mention that, the contents were written as per my dictation.
19. It is true that, on page No.136 of Ex.P147 a date is mentioned. The date is over written. Except in page No.134 in none of the other pages it is mentioned that the slides of samples were examined or seen on a particular date. It is true that, except in the pages pertain in this case in none other pages the date is not mentioned near the report. It is true that, in page No.135 there are lot of corrections, over writings, scratches found. Similarly in page No.136 also we 80 SC No.538/2004 may find lot of corrections, overwriting, scratches etc. I did not subscribe my signatures or initial on any other pages from 134 to 137. Similarly, no signature or initial of Dr. Agale can be found on any of the above pages. No endorsement is made as to who has made correction, over writings etc. on the above pages."
121. I have perused the register as per Ex. P-147. It appears that there is some manipulation in the pagination concerning to the entries in respect of this case and also some corrections etc., It has been suggested to Pw-46 that in order to help Pw-3 the father of deceased Kirti, they have prepared a false report as per P-146 and they have intentionally substituted page 135 and 136 by removing the original pages from the register. Considering the cross-examination of Pw-46, the defence of accused persons cannot be disbelieved. Pw-46 has stated that in Ex. D-2 Photo album pertaining to second post mortem examination, he and Pw- 45 are not seen in those photographs. The accused persons have seriously disputed the presence of Pw-45 and 46 at the time of second post mortem examination.
122. The evidence discloses that the first two documents came into existence after the death of deceased Kirti were Ex. P-1 and 2. Ex.P-1 is MLC intimation to the police and Ex.P-2 is the 81 SC No.538/2004 extract of accident information register of M.S. Ramaiah hospital. Pw-2 Dr. Gopalappa H. has stated in his evidence that he has issued those 2 documents. In his cross-examination he has stated that he has not found any injuries on the dead body of Kirti. The next document is the complaint of Pw-1 to Sanjay nagar police. In it also there is no reference to the injuries found on the dead body. Next document is the inquest report as per Ex.P-13. Even in this document also there is reference to the injuries found on the dead body. Ex. P-25 is the complaint given by Pw-3 to the Spl. Executive Magistrate. In this document also there is no mention about the injuries found on the dead body of deceased Kirti. In the evidence of Pw-1, 3, 4 and 5 they have stated regarding the injuries on the nose, lips and hands of deceased Kirti. However, in the Post Mortem report, there is no reference to the injuries on the nose, lips of the deceased Kirti. In the Post mortem report as per Ex. P- 43, it is stated that injuries were found on the left elbow and neck. The injury on the neck for the first time stated in the post mortem report. The injury on the neck was an external injury and it was measuring 8x4 cms according to the Post mortem report. Therefore, the said injury could have been easily noticed by the persons who have seen the dead body. Strangely none of the 82 SC No.538/2004 relatives of the deceased Kirti nor the Doctor who has seen the dead body for the first time nor the Spl. Executive Magistrate who has conducted inquest mahazar has noticed the said injury. Under such circumstances, it cannot be disbelieved that the injuries were introduced for the first time in the Post mortem report.
123. In the Histo pathology report as per Ex. P-47, the Pw-27 has given opinion that the death was due to Cardio respiratory failure as a result of Sub-aracnoid hemorrhage consequent upon the injury to neck and hand. As already discussed, in the evidence of Pw-27 he has stated that there was no chances of smothering and throttling and there was no chances of causing traumatic injuries to the brain. He has also stated that the death was due to hanging or strangulation and it is not a suicidal death. But strangely in his post mortem report he has stated that death was due to cardio respiratory failure as a result of Subaracnoid hammorhage consequent upon injury to neck and head. Once Pw- 27 has stated that he is not competent to speak about Rofecoxib drug. Again, he has given evidence that the death of the deceased occurred due to complications of prolonged consumption of non- streroidal anti inflammatory drugs and Rofecoxib. But, the evidence of FSL expert is that the quantity of Rofecoxib drug 83 SC No.538/2004 found in the dead body was not enough to cause death. The evidence of Pw-27 who has conducted the Post mortem examination is totally inconsistent. From such inconsistent evidence of Pw-27, the defence is able to create doubt regarding the cause of death and also injuries found on the dead body. Therefore, the injuries as stated by Pw-27 and cause of death stated by him cannot be accepted. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove that the death of deceased Kirti is homicidal and it was caused by accused No.1. Under such circumstances, the question of considering whether it was a culpable homicide amounting to murder or culpable homicide not amounting to murder, does not arise. Hence, I answer Points No. 7 and 8 in the Negative and that point no.9 does not arise for consideration.
124. Point No.10:- The prosecution has failed to prove that there was dowry demand by the accused persons and they subjected the deceased Kirti to cruelty to meet their demand for dowry. Under such circumstances, though the death of deceased has taken place within 7 years from the date of her marriage , the prosecution failed to prove that it is a dowry death. Though there is something in the diaries of deceased Kirti, which goes to show 84 SC No.538/2004 that she was upset inview of the attitude of accused No.1 and she suspected relationship of accused with another lady. There is no sufficient evidence to prove that accused No.1 was having relationship with another lady and in view of the said there used to be quarrel between them and it led to either homicidal death or suicidal death of the deceased Kirti. There is no sufficient evidence to show that there was dowry demand and deceased subjected to cruelty to meet the dowry demand. Accordingly, I answer Point No. 10 in the Negative.
125. Point No. 11: In view of my above discussion, the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, benefit of doubt will have to go to accused No.1 to 3. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
O R D E R Acting under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C., accused No.1 to 3 are hereby acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 304-B, 498-A R/w. 34 of IPC and Sec. 3, 4 and 6 of Dowry prohibition Act.
The bail bonds and surety bonds of accused No.1 to 3 shall stand cancelled.
The material objects marked in this case being valuable articles shall be released to Pw-3 Vijay Naval Patil who is the father of deceased Kirti after completion of the 85 SC No.538/2004 appeal period on proper identification and due acknowledgement.
The accused No.1 to 3 shall offer surety in compliance of Sec. 436(A) of Cr.P.C.
(Dictated to the Judgement writer, transcribed and computerised by her and after corrections, printout taken and then pronounced and signed by me in the open Court, on this the 29th day of April, 2023) (Yashawanth kumar) LI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City.
ANNEXURE List of the witnesses examined for the prosecution-side:
PW.1 R.D. Lavande.
PW.2 Dr. Gopalappa .H.
PW.3 Vijay Patil
PW.4 Smt. Priyadarshini Patil
PW.5 Sheela Patil
PW.6 N. Nanjunde gowda
PW.7 S. Srinivas
PW.8 Loganathan
PW.9 Lakshmi Narayana
PW.10 Y.R.Nagaraj,
PW.11 Veena,
PW.12 Srinivasa Murthy
PW.13 Pragnya
PW.14 Ravindra Jagathap
PW.15 Dr. M.R. Samdhya.
PW.16 Wilson
PW.17 Suresh
PW.18 Stanley
PW.19 Vayumbe
PW.20 H.R.Ravishankar,
PW.21 S. Paneerselvam,
86
SC No.538/2004
PW.22 Girish
PW.23 Shashidhara
PW.24 Chikkapeddanna K.G.
PW.25 Shivaputhrappa.
PW.26 Dr. M. Sudha Rao
PW.27 Dr. Bheemappa Havanur.
PW.28 Rohith
PW.29 M.P.Swaroop
PW.30 N. Shankar Rao
PW.31 Mallikarjuna Hegde
PW.32 Rajendra prakash Patil
PW.33 N. Suresh,
PW.34 P.S.Rangaswami,
PW.35 Chandrashekar Rao
PW.36 Gulab Rao Trayambaka Patil
PW.37 M. Hanumanthiah
PW.38 V.G.Nayak
PW.39 Anand M.
PW.40 A. Dadapheer,
PW.41 Milind Lakshmikantha Patil
PW.42 Dr. Mangala Chowhan,
PW.43 K. Purushotham
PW.44 Ganapathi M.K.
PW.45 Vijay Vishnu Wase
PW.46 Dhaneshwar
List of documents exhibited for the prosecution-side :
Ex.P.1 Report issued by Pw-2.
Ex.P.2 Accident Register extract
Ex.P.3 Complaint dt: 3.4.2004
Ex.P.3(a) Signature of Pw-3
Ex.P.4 R.C. Register extract.
Ex.P.5 Letter issued by Pw-7
Ex. P-5.a. Signature of Pw-7
Ex.P.6 Letter issued by Sub-divn.
Ex.P.6.a. Signature
Ex. P7 Letter issued by Pw-8
Ex. P7.a. Signature of Pw-8
Ex.P.8 Statement of call details
Ex. P-8.a. Signature o f Pw-8.
87
SC No.538/2004
Ex.P.9 Dairy of 2002
Ex.P.9(a to k) Portion marked in Ex. P-9.
Ex.P.10 LIC Dairy of 2002
Ex.P.10(a to v) Portion marked in Ex. P-10.
Ex.P.11 Dairy, Ex.P.11(a to s) Portion marked in Ex. P-11 Ex.P.12 4 sheets of paper (FSL) Ex.P.13 - " - 21 Ex.P.14 - " - 22 Ex.P.15 - " - 23 Ex.P.16 Nita Acada letter Ex.P.17 2 sheets of paper (Statement) Ex.P.18 to P23 Hand writings Ex.P.24 Certified Q 299/2004 Ex.P.24.a. Signature of Pw-9 Ex.P.24.b. 4 sheets of paper S. 21 to 23 Q1 to Q 59.
Ex.P.24.c. Signature of Pw-9
Ex.P.24.d Sample seal
Ex.P.25 Complaint dt: 3.4.2004
Ex.P.25.a Signature of Pw-15.
Ex.P.26 Letter in envelop
Ex.P.27 & 28 2 Bills.
Ex.P.29 Appln. Of A-1.
Ex.P.29(a) Signature of Pw-15
Ex.P.30.a & b Signature of Pw-15
Ex.P.31 Copy of declaration
Ex. P.31.a. Signature of Pw-15
Ex.P.32 Medical college register extract.
Ex.P.33 Night duty of Niranjan.
Ex. P.33.a. Signature
Ex.P.34 Statement of Pw-16
Ex.P.35. Loan account statement
Ex.P.35 a & b Signatures.
Ex.P.36. Sketch
Ex.P.36.a. Signature of Pw-23.
Ex.P.37 Letter from Asst. Executive officer
dt: 21.6.2004.
Ex.P.38 E.C.
Ex.P.38.a. Signature of Pw-24
Ex.P.39 Inquest mahazar.
Ex.P.39.a. Signature of Pw-25.
88
SC No.538/2004
Ex.P.39.b. Signature of Pw-29
Ex.P.40 Letter
Ex.P.40.a. Signature of Pw-25
Ex. P41. Report
Ex. P-41.a. Signature of Pw-16
Ex. P42. Opinion dt: 22.6.2004.
Ex. P-42.a. Signature of Pw-26.
Ex. P 43. P.M. Report
Ex. P43(a) Signature of Pw-27
Ex. P.44 Letter
Ex. P.44.a. Signature of Pw-27
Ex.P.45 Letter
Ex.P.45.a. Signature of Pw-27.
Ex.P.46 Letter
Ex.P.46.a. Signature
Ex. P47 Letter dt: 11.6.2010
Ex. P47.a. Signature of Pw-20
Ex. P48 Letter dt: 14.6.2004
Ex.P.49 Letter dt; 3.4.2004
Ex. P.50 Covering letter.
Ex.P.51 Letter dt; 5.4.2004
Ex.P.52 Request letter
Ex.P.53 Letter
Ex.P.54 Mahazar
Ex.P.54.a. Signature of Pw-30
Ex.P.55 Mahazar
Ex.P.55.a. Signature of Pw-30
Ex.P.56 Mahazar
Ex.P.56.a. Signature of Pw-32
Ex.P.57 Mahazar
Ex.P.57.a. Signature of Pw-33
Ex.P.58 Mahazar
Ex.P.58.a. Signature of Pw-34.
Ex.P.59 Passport(Book)
Ex.P60 Mahazar
Ex.P.60.a. Signature of Pw-34
Ex. P61 Note book
Ex.P.61.a. Signature of Pw-36
Ex.P.61.b. Signature of Pw-35
Ex.P.62 F.I.R.
Ex.P.62.a. Signature
Ex.P.63 PF No. 29(A)/04.
89
SC No.538/2004
Ex.P.63.a. Signature of Pw-37
Ex.P.64 Mahazar
Ex.P.64.a. Signature
Ex. P-65 PF No. 29/04
Ex.P.65.a. Signature of CW 67
Ex.P.66 FSL Report
Ex.P.66.a. Signature of Pw-35
Ex.P.67 Reply dt: 4.8.2004.
Ex.P.67.a. Signature of Pw-38
Ex.P68 Mahazar
Ex.P.68.a. Signature
Ex.P.70 Passport of accused No.1
Ex.P.71 Kirti's Passport
Ex.P.72 Passbook
Ex.P.73-74 Election I.D card
Ex.P.75 Pan Card
Ex.P.76 Dairy Vijay
Ex.P.77 Acqua Group
Ex.P.78 RBE Dairy
Ex.P.79 Zekno English dairy
Ex.P.80-81 Zekno letters
Ex.P.82 Sanjeeveni Clinic
Ex.P.83 Minatory with keyboard
Ex.P.84 Vizard company keyboard
Ex.P.85 One Stabilizer
Ex.P.86 Modem Degitex
Ex.P.87-92 6 Codex series
Ex.P.93 12 flopis
Ex.P.94 4 cassettes
Ex.P.95-96 Tickets
Ex.P.97-98 Report
Ex.P.99 Visiting card
Ex.P.100 FIR
Ex.P.100.a Signature
Ex.P.101 P.F. No. 32/A/04
Ex.P.102 Report
Ex.P.102.a Signature of PW43
Ex.P.103 P.F. No. 53/2004
Ex.P.103.a Signature
Ex.P.104 Mahazar
Ex.P.104.a Signature
Ex.P.105 P.F. No. 54/2004
90
SC No.538/2004
Ex.P.106 P.F. No. 70/2004
Ex.P.107 P.F. No. 71/2004
Ex.P.108 Mahazar
Ex.P.108.a Signature
Ex.P.109 P.F. No. 72/2004
Ex.P.110 P.F. No. 73/2004
Ex.P.111-118 Photos
Ex.P.111.a -118.a Signature
Ex.P.119 Letter
Ex.P.119.a Signature of PW44
Ex.P.120 Letter
Ex.P.120.a Signature of PW44
Ex.P.121 Letter
Ex.P.121.a Signature of PW44
Ex.P.122 Letter dt: 9.7.2004
Ex.P.122.a Signature of PW44
Ex.P.123 Report
Ex.P.123.a Signature
Ex.P.124 Letter dt:22.6.2004
Ex.P.125 Letter
Ex.P.126 Letter
Ex.P.126.a Signature of PW44
Ex.P.127 Letter of mobile No. 23.06.2004
Ex.P.127.a Signature of PW44
Ex.P.128 Letter from Bank manager.
Ex.P.128.a. Signature of Pw-44
Ex.P.129 Copy of letter to Bheemappa Havanur.
Ex.P.130 Letter to Manager, Kumar park,
Ex.P.131 Letter to Bheemappa Havanur.
Ex.P.131.a. Signature of Pw-44
Ex.P.132 Copy of letter to Bheemappa Havanur.
Ex.P.133 Copy of letter to Subregistrar, Gandhinagar,
Ex.P.134 Letter to HOD, Pathology,
Ex.P.135 Copy of Letter to HOD "
Ex.P.136 Copy of letter dt: 22.4.2004
Ex.P.136.a. Signature of Pw-44
Ex.P.137 Letter to Manager, LIC,
Ex.P.138 Letter to FSL Director
Ex.P.139 Letter dt: 8.4.2004
Ex.P.140 Letter dt: 21.6.2004
Ex.P.141 Letter dt: 16.7.2004
Ex.P.142 Letter dt: 13.9.2005
91
SC No.538/2004
Ex.P.143 Modi Medical jurisprudence
Ex.P.143.a. Relevant portion.
Ex.P.143.b. Relevant portion
Ex.P.144 P.M. Report.
Ex.P. 144.a. Signature
Ex.P.145 Final cause of death.
Ex.P.146 Histo pathology reported
Ex.P.146.a. Signature
Ex.P.147 P.S.P.M. Register Book.
Ex.P.147.a. Signature.
List of material-objects marked for the prosecution-side:
In P.F. No. 73/2004 M.O.1 Titan Watch M.O.2 4 pairs of gold bangles M.O.3 1 pair of gold bangle with black stone M.O.4 1 gold chain with OM pendent M.O.5 1 necklece with read and white pearl M.O.5.A 1 pair steeds M.O.6.A 1 ring with 8 white stones M.O.6.B 1 love shape ring M.O.6.C 1 Ring M.O.6.D 1 Ring M.O.6.E Plain Ring M.O.7.A Diamond Ring M.O.7.B Diamond Ring M.O.8 1 love design pendent M.O.9 Chamundeshwari pendent M.O.10.A 1 necklece with white stone M.O.10.B 1 necklece with white stone M.O.11.A 1 ear steed with white stone M.O.11.B 1 pair of ear steed M.O.11.C 1 pair of ear steed M.O.12 1 pair of ear steed M.O.13.A 1 pair of hanging steed M.O.13.B 1 pair of hanging steed M.O.13.C 1 pair of hanging steed M.O.14 1 chain with white pearl M.O.15.A Plain necklece M.O.15.B Plain steed M.O.16 1 Mangalya chian with 2 thalies 92 SC No.538/2004 M.O.17 2 bangles M.O.18 2 pair of bangles M.O.19.A Diamond Ear steed M.O.19.B Ear steed M.O.19.C Ear steed M.O.19.D Ear steed M.O.20 Plain gold chain M.O.21 Lakshmi Pendent M.O.22 Necklece with gold pendent M.O.23 1 pendent M.O.24 Titan ladies watch M.O.25 Design rings M.O.26 Silver Hemp M.O.27 Silver cups M.O.28.A Silver lamps M.O.28.B Small silver lamps M.O.28.C Silver Jazze and key bunch M.O.30 2 bangles of white metal M.O.31.A 1 big silver coin M.O.31.B 1 small silver coin M.O.32 Silver chain M.O.33 Silver plate M.O.34 Rs. 2,120/-
P.F. No. 73/A/2004 dt: 26.06.2004
M.O.1 1 gold Arons Ring
M.O.2 Step neck chain
M.O.3 Long necklece
M.O.4 Gold waist chain
M.O.5 Small necklece
M.O.6 Step chain
M.O.7 Rubi necklece
M.O.8 Gold necklece with white stone
M.O.9 Gents chain
M.O.10 Neck chain with pendent
M.O.11.A Brace light
M.O.11.B Brace light
M.O.11.C Brace light
M.O.11.D Brace light
M.O.12.A Gold ring
M.O.12.B Gold ring
93
SC No.538/2004
M.O.12.C Gold ring
M.O.12.D Gold ring
M.O.12.E Gold ring
M.O.12.F Toe ring
M.O.12.G Toe ring
M.O.13.A Ring with big white stone
M.O.13.B Ring with small white stone
M.O.13.C Navarathna Ring
M.O.14 Steed
M.O.15 Hanging steed
M.O.16 Stead with read stone
M.O.17 Papat puri Head chain
M.O.18.A Small chain
M.O.18.B Small chain
M.O.19.A Bangle with read stone
M.O.19.B Bangle with read stone
M.O.20 1 pair of gold bangle
M.O.21 1 pair of gold bangle
M.O.22 1 pair of gold bangles
M.O.23 1 pair of gold bangles
List of witnesses examined for the defence-side :
-Nil-
List of documents exhibited for the defence-side :
Ex.D.1 Photo
Ex.D.2 Photo Album
LI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru City.
94
SC No.538/2004
(Judgment pronounced in the open-
court. Operative-portion of the
same is as under)
ORDER
Acting under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C., accused is hereby acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 417, 420 and 506 of I.P.C.
The bail bond and surety bond of accused shall stands cancelled.
95
SC No.538/2004 The accused shall offer surety in compliance of Sec. 436(A) of Cr.P.C. within a week from this date.
(Yashawanth kumar) LI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City.
96 SC No.538/2004 (Judgment pronounced in the open-court. Operative-portion of the same is as under) ORDER LI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City 97 SC No.538/2004