Karnataka High Court
State Of Karnataka vs Venkoba Rao on 15 March, 2013
Bench: Mohan.M.Shantanagoudar, B.S.Indrakala
-: 1 :-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH, 2013
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAN .M. SHANTANAGOUDAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE B.S. INDRAKALA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 191/2008
BETWEEN:
STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY K.R.S. POLICE,
MANDYA DISTRICT. .. APPELLANT
(By SRI G.M. SRINIVASA REDDY, HCGP)
AND:
1. VENKOBA RAO,
S/O LATE RAMACHANDRA RAO,
32 YEARS,
2. SUBADRA BAI,
W/O LATE RAMACHANDRA RAO,
70 YEARS.
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT MAJJEGEPURA
ROAD, K.R. SAGAR, S.R. PATNA TALUK,
MANDYA.
3. CHANDROJI RAO,
S/O LATE APPAJI RAO,
-: 2 :-
44 YEARS, R/I K.R. PATE TOWN,
HAKKI HEBBAL, K.R. PET TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT. .. RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI C.H. JADHAV, FOR SRI P.PRASANNA KUMAR,
ADVOCATE.)
******
This Criminal Appeal is filed under Sections 378(1) and
(3) of Cr.P.C. by the State Public Prosecutor praying to grant
leave to file an appeal against the judgment dated
25.01.2007 passed by the Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-
I, Mandya in S.C.No.51/00 acquitting the
respondents/accused for the offences punishable under
Sections 498-A, 304-B, 306 r/w Section 34 of IPC and
Sections 3, 4 & 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
This appeal coming on for Hearing this day, Mohan
.M. Shantanagoudar J., delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is by the State against the judgment and order of acquittal, dated 25.1.2007 passed by the Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Mandya in S.C.No. 51/2000 acquitting the respondents/accused for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 306 r/w Sec. 34 of IPC and Sections 3, 4 & 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act. -: 3 :-
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the marriage of Rekha Bai with accused No.1 was performed on 5.7.1999; at the time of the marriage, Rs.50,000/- cash and 50 grams of gold ornaments were decided to be given in favour of accused No.1; accused No.1 used to torture the deceased on the ground of deceased did not bring the scooter from her parental place; since the deceased could not tolerate the ill-treatment, she committed suicide by hanging to the ceiling fan with the help of her saree. A complaint came to be lodged by P.W.3 - the father of the deceased as per Ex.P.1 before P.W.23 - the Sub-Inspector of Police attached to K.R.S. Police Station. Based on the said complaint - Ex.P.1, a case in Crime No. 13/2000 was registered and FIR was sent to the jurisdictional Magistrate as per Ex.P.22. During the course of investigation, the police have conducted the mahazars of scene of offence, seizure pachanama, etc and sent the dead body for postmortem examination. P.W.12 Dr. G.M. Manjunath conducted the postmortem examination and issued the -: 4 :- report as per Ex.P. 7. He has opined that the death is due to asphyxia as a result of hanging. The doctor has also opined that the saree seized might have been used for committing suicide. The statement of various witnesses including the family members of the deceased were recorded during the course of investigation and the inquest panchanama was held by the Taluka Executive Magistrate (P.W.18) as per Ex.P.10. After completion of the investigation, the police laid the charge sheet for the aforementioned offences against the accused.
3. Accused No.1 is the husband of the deceased. P.W.2 is the mother of the deceased and accused No.3 is the brother-in-law of accused No.1 (husband of sister of accused No.1).
4. In order to prove its case, the prosecution in all examined 24 witnesses and got marked 23 exhibits and one material objects. On behalf of the defence, one exhibit was got marked from the statement of P.W.3 made before the -: 5 :- police. The Court below after evaluating the material on record and after hearing on both sides, acquitted the accused giving benefit of doubt in favour of the accused.
5. Both the learned Advocates have taken us through the material on record and the judgment and order of the Court below.
6. The complaint - Ex.P.1 nowhere reveals the demand of dowry and payment of dowry prior or at the time of marriage. The complaint merely discloses that an amount of Rs.50,000/- and the gold ornaments weighing about 50 grams were given to the family members of the bridegroom at the time of the marriage and thereafter, the marriage was performed. Nowhere it reveals that there was a demand by the accused in respect of money as well as the gold ornaments.
7. So is the evidence of P.W.3 - the complainant before the Court. In the examination-in-chief itself, P.W.3 being -: 6 :- the father of the deceased has deposed that about 15 days prior to the marriage, betrothal ceremony was performed and at that point of time, it was decided to give Rs.50,000/- in cash and 50 grams of gold ornaments. He has not specifically deposed that there was a demand of dowry by the accused at that time. However, he - the complainant has improved his version before the Court. As aforementioned, he had merely stated in the complaint that Rs.50,000/- cash and 50 grams of gold were given to the family members of the bridegroom at the time of marriage but in the evidence, P.W.3 has deposed that accused Nos. 1 and 3 demanded Rs.75,000/- towards dowry as also 80 grams of gold but P.W.3 agreed to give dowry worth Rs.50,000/- in cash and 50 grams of gold. Thus it is clear that P.W.3 has improved his version relating to demand of dowry before the Court which was not found in the complaint. In the cross-examination, P.W.3 has admitted that Rs.50,000/- cash was given to accused No.1 during the marriage talks and that nothing was paid to accused No.1 or -: 7 :- any other accused at the time of betrothal ceremony. He has further narrated in the cross-examination that 50 grams of gold was not actually given to the accused but they were provided to accused in the form of ornaments of bride. On the date of the marriage, P.W.3 being the father of the bride had given the gold ornaments weighing about 50 grams in the form of ornaments to his daughter. He has further admitted that it was customary to give gold ornaments at the time of the marriage to the bride and likewise, he had given the gold ornaments to his daughter as per the custom. He has further deposed that he had made arrangements to secure such gold ornaments since 4 years prior to the marriage only with a view to provide the gold ornaments to his daughter. Thus it is clear that there was no actual demand of any amount by the accused and consequently, there was no payment of dowry as such by P.W.3 and his family members. What has been provided by P.W.3 and his family members to the bride and bridegroom are all offerings as per the custom prevailing in the community. -: 8 :-
8. If we meticulously peruse the evidence of P.W.3, it makes clear that the victim was too sensitive. At one point time, P.W.3 had taken the victim to the doctor. After examining, the said doctor had told P.W.3 that the victim is not suffering from any illness but she may be suffering from some mental illness and thereafter some tonic was given to the victim by the said doctor. After consuming such tonic, the health of the victim had been improved.
9. The victim used to write letters to P.W.3 and in the said letters, as admitted by P.W.3 himself, she used to write that she is doing well and her health is good.
10. However, the case of the prosecution is that the accused used to demand scooter from the parents of the deceased after the marriage and since the scooter was not provided to accused No.1 by the parents of deceased; the accused used to torture the deceased both physically and mentally. But this aspect of the case of the prosecution cannot be believed by the Court in view of attending -: 9 :- circumstances. Ex.D.1 -a portion of the statement made by P.W.3 before the police discloses that the deceased had taken certain pills about 2 months prior to the incident in question and at that point of time, she was suffering from mental depression. The statement of P.W.3 as per Ex.D.1 finds support from the deposition of P.W.3 made before the Court. As aforementioned, the victim was taken by P.W.3 to a doctor earlier to the incident in question and at that point of time, the doctor had told P.W.3 that the victim is suffering from mental illness and she is not suffering from any other illness. P.W.3 has further admitted in his cross-examination that prior to the incident, accused No.2 was not feeling well and had become very weak. At that point of time, the sister of accused No.1 had come to his house [the parental house of the sister of accused No.1] for the purpose of confinement. In this context, a suggestion is made to P.W.3 by the defence that the deceased was not willing to take care of the ailing mother-in-law and sister-in-law of the victim who had just given birth to her baby. P.W.3 has admitted that accused -: 10 :- No.1 was advising the victim not to live separately from his mother as his mother is unwell and has become weak. P.W.3 has volunteered to state that for the said proposal of accused No.1, the deceased was not willing, which means that the deceased was not willing to live with the joint family members of accused No.1 and she wanted to make a separate house. P.W.3 has further admitted that the deceased was over sensitive. In that regard, she was advised properly by P.W.3.
11. One of the diaries maintained by the deceased is seized and produced before the Court as per Ex.P.2. The said diary does not in any where reveal that there was demand of dowry at any point of time as also there was a demand to bring the scooter from her parental house. She has merely stated in the diary that accused No.1 was not liking the deceased and the deceased was not liking to have co-habitation (sexual relationship) with accused No.1. Thus it is clear that the accused neither had demanded the dowry -: 11 :- nor had demanded scooter even after the marriage. The problem seems to be that the deceased herself was not having a adjustable quality; probably she may not be willing to live with the family members of accused No.1. She also did not even had the intention of co-habitation with accused No.1. In that regard, the accused started consuming liquor once in 3 days. This fact is also mentioned in the diary maintained by the victim. Thus these facts clearly go to show that the case as made by the prosecution against the accused cannot be believed. Since there was no demand of dowry or harassment demanding additional amount of dowry in the form of scooter, the trial Court was justified in acquitting the accused.
12. Since the trial Court has taken one of the possible views, under the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not deem it proper to interfere with such judgment or order of acquittal passed by the trial Court. We also find that the Trial Court was justified in arriving at the conclusion that -: 12 :- the prosecution has not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal fails and the same stands dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE Nsu/-