IN THE COURT OF LVI ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE PRESENT: SRI.HATTIKAL PRABHU.S. M.A.,LL.B(Spl) LL.M., DATED THIS THE 03rd DAY OF OCTOBER, 2018 Serial Number of the C.C.27293/2011 case Name of the State by Police Inspector, complainant R.T.Nagar Police station (Reptd. by Sr.Asst.Public Prosecutor ) Name of the accused 1) Shivakumar person S/o.Venkataramadu, Aged about 32 years, 2). Venkataramadu, S/o.late. Narasappa, Aged about 70 years, 3). Smt.Nagamma, W/o.Venkataramadu, Aged about 65 years, 4). Pavan Kumar, S/o.Anjinappa, Aged about 30 years, 5).Smt.Narsamma, W/o.Mahesh, Aged about 34 years, 6). Murthy, S/o.Venkataramadu, Aged about 27 years, 2 C.C.27293/2011 7). Nagaraju, S/o.Venkataramadu, Aged about 23 years, All are R/a.No.8, 1st cross, Christian Colony, Srirampura, Bangalore-21 (Reptd. by Sri.SMG... Adv., Date of commencement In between 02.07.2003 and of offence 02.07.2009 Offences complained of U/Secs. 498(A) of the IPC and Sec. 3 and 4 of D.P.Act. Date of arrest of A2 to 7 are not arrested, accused Accused no.2 to 7 are on anticipatory bail in Crl.Misc.2880/2011 24.06.2011 Date of release of accused on bail 19.07.2011 Date of commencement 10.10.2012 of recording evidence Date of closure of 12.06.2018 recording evidence Offences Proved Nil Plea of the accused and Not guilty his examination : Final Order : Accused Not found guilty Date of final order 03.10.2018 3 C.C.27293/2011 JUDGMENT
U/Sec. 355 of the Cr.P.C I. The facts which are necessary to decide this case are as under: 1 .
The allegations against the accused : That the accused no.1 married C.W.1Smt.Kalavathi on 14.02.2011 in accordance with the customs and at the time of marriage received gold and cash as dowry and at the instigation of accused no.2 to 7, the accused no.1 extended physical and mental cruelty to C.W.1 by demanding additional dowry and and thereby the accused no.1 to 7 committed the offences punishable U/Secs.3 and 4 of D.P.Act and Sec. 498(A) of IPC.
2. After submitting the charge sheet, criminal case against accused came to be registered. Section 207 Cr.P.Ccomplied. Accused no.2 to 7 were on bail. Accused no.1 remained absconding and as split up charge sheet was registered against accused no.1 in C.C.4447/2014 and later on 23.05.2017 accused no.1 appeared and the split 4 C.C.27293/2011 up C.C.4447/2014 was merged with this case. Charge sheet copy furnished to the accused no.1 to 7.
The charge framed and read over to the accused no.1 to 7 . Accused no.1 to 7 denied the charges leveled against them as false and pleaded not guilty.
3. On behalf of prosecution, evidence of P.W.1 to 5 adduced and documents at Ex.P.1 to 4 are got marked.
4. After closure of prosecution evidence, accused no.1 to 7 are examined U/Sec.313(1)(b) Cr.P.C, the accused no.1 to 7 denied each and every incriminating circumstances found against them, as false. No defence evidence on behalf of accused.
5. Heard both sides,
6. Now the point that arises for the determination of this court is:
“Whether the prosecution proves the alleged guilt of the accused no.1 to 7 for the offences punishable U/Sec. 3 and 4 of 5 C.C.27293/2011 D.P.Act and Sec.498(A) of the IPC, beyond all reasonable doubt?
My finding on the above point is in the Negative for the reasons stated below:
II. Brief statement of reasons
1. In support of the case of the prosecution, the informant of crime C.W.1Smt.Kalavathi who is wifeof accused no.1 Shivakumar is examined as P.W.2. Father of C.W.1 by name Krishna (C.W.2) is examined as P.W.3. C.W.3 who is mother of C.W.1 is examined as P.W..4. C.W.4 one Sri. Babu is examined as P.W.5 claiming to be circumstantial witness. C.W.5 one Sri.Ranjith is examined as P.W.1 claiming to be circumstantial witness.
2. P.W.2, 3 and 4 deposed supporting the case of the prosecution. P.W.1 one Sri.Ranjith turned hostile to the case of the prosecution. P.W.4 one Sri. Babu in his evidence deposed that accused no.1 used to inform him that there is problem in his home for lack of understanding between himself and C.W.1.
3. The prosecution failed to secure other witnesses inspite of giving sufficient opportunities.
4. During course of trial, the defence of the accused is that the C.W.1 failed to adjust in the matrimonial home and she insisted for setting up a separate house in order to avoid household work. Further it is contention of the accused that C.W.1 was not interested to lead matrimonial life with accused no.1 for that she used to make allegation of illicit relationship of accused no.1 with one Shashikala. Further it is contention of the accused that at the instigation of C.W.1 and her parents, separate house was set up, but the C.W.1 made the accused no.1 to leave the house and accordingly accused no.1 left the house for long period. It is contention of the accused that when panchayath was conveyed relating to the dispute of illicit relationship, the relatives of C.W.1 assaulted accused no.1 and thereafter under the apprehension that accused no.1 would initiate legal action , a false complaint is filed.
5. During cross examination of P.W.2 to 4 suggestions are posed as per defence of the accused. During examination of the accused also accused no.1 and 2 explained that they are poor persons and C.W.1 failed to adjust with them and she voluntarily left the matrimonial home.
6. During course of arguments, learned Sr.Asst. Public Prosecutor argued that the evidence of P.W. 2 to 4 is sufficient to establish the alleged guilt of the accused and he prayed to convict the accused.
7. On the other hand, it is argued on behalf of accused that the admissions given by P.W.2 to 4 as to conveying panchayath and as to abscondance of accused no.1, coupled with the circumstances explained by them is sufficient to establish the defence of the accused. Further it is argued that the accused are innocent and not committed any offences and prosecution also failed to bring home the guilt of the accused.
8. This court observed that the prosecution failed to satisfactorily establish the fact of giving dowry by way of cash etc., by adducing specific evidence. Who gave cash to which accused, on which date cash was given and other particulars are not explained. Particularly demand of dowry is not explained. It is allegation against accused that all accused demanded dowry and taken dowry. In the cross examination it is categorically admitted that all the accused are not residing together. Admittedly the accused are relatives of C.W1 to 3 prior to the marriage. Under these circumstances, this court comes to the conclusion that the evidence placed on record is not sufficient to hold that accused demanded dowrt and taken dowry as alleged.
9. Coming to the question of demanding additional dowry and cruelty for the purpose of procuring additional dowry, this court observed that the P.W.2 to 4 deposed before court that there is serious dispute relating to alleged illicit relationship of accused no.1 with Shashikala. The P.W.4 in the cross examination categorically admitted that after conveying panchayath relating to allegations of illicit relationship, separate house was set up for C.W.1 and accused no.1. Further P.W.4 categorically admitted that in the said separate house the accused no.1 and C.W.1 lived separately. Further this court observed that there is no specific explanation on the part of the accused as to demanding additional dowry by particular accused. No specific allegation is made out as to harassment or cruelty at the hands of accused by demanding additional dowry. It is undisputed fact that the accused and C.W.1 failed to adjust with each other and panchayath was conveyed and accused no.1 left the house and he was absconding. Further this court observed that the split up case was registered against accused no.1 and subsequently split up case is merged in this case.
10. Under these circumstances, I would like to rely on the decision reported in AIR 2010 SUPREME COURT 3363Preeti Gupta & Anr. Vs.State of Jharkand & Anr wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, wherein it is held that 10 C.C.27293/2011 “Penal code. S. 498A Ss.3,4Harassment and demand of dowrycomplaint filed by the wife against husband and his relatives
No specific allegations in the complaint against appellants, sister in law and unmarried brother in law of complainantAppellants residing at different placeNeither visited the place of incidentNor lived with complainant and her husbandTheir implication in complaint is meant to harass and humiliate husband’s relativepermitting complainant to pursue complaint would be abuse of process of lawcomplaint, held liable to be quashed”
11. After going through the law laid down in the above said decision and after considering the facts and circumstances, of the present case on hand, this court comes to the conclusion that the evidence placed on record is not sufficient to establish that accused extended cruelty towards the C.W.1 relating to additional dowry. Hence this court held that necessary ingredients U/Sec.498A of the IPC is not satisfactorily proved by the prosecution.
12. Under these circumstances, this court comes to the conclusion that it is not safe and proper to convict the accused for the alleged offences. Accordingly this court held that prosecution failed to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts. Accordingly I answer the above point in the Negative and proceed to pass the following order…
III. Final Order:
Acting U/Sec.248(1) of Cr.P.C I hereby acquit the accused no.1 to 7 for the offences punishable U/Sec.498(A) of the IPC and Sec.3 and 4 of the D.P.Act.
Accused no.1 to 7 are set at liberty forthwith and the bail bonds of accused and that of surety stand canceled.
(Judgment dictated to the Stenographer, typed by her computerized copy corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 03rd day of October 2018).
(Hattikal Prabhu .S) LVI Addl.C.M.M. Bangalore.
******** 12 C.C.27293/2011 :ANNEXURE:
1.List of Witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution:
P.W.1: Sri.S.Ranjith P.W.2: Smt.Kalavathi P.W.3: Sri.Krishna.C P.W.4: Smt.Vasanthamma P.W.5: Sri.Babu
2. List of Documents marked on behalf of the prosecution: Ex.P.1:-Statement of P.W.1 Ex.P.2: Complaint Ex.P.2(a): Signature Ex.P.3Wedding card Ex.P.4: 06 wedding photos
3.: List of witnesses and documents marked on behalf of the accused NIL
4. List of Material objects marked on behalf of the prosecution:
Nil (Hattikal Prabhu.S) LVI Addl.C.M.M. Bangalore.