IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION No.8623 OF 2016 BETWEEN:
1. Sri. Vishwanatha, S/o. Krishnappa, Aged about 32 years, R/at 2nd Cross Road, Jayanagar, Hassan Town – 34.
2. Smt. Chandana B.R. @ Kavya, W/o. Vishwanatha, Aged about 28 years, R/at 2nd Cross Road, Jayanagar, Hassan Town – 34. …Petitioners (By Sri. Pratheep K.C., Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka, Represented by the Pension Mohalla Police Station, Hassan District – 573 201.
2. Shesamma, W/o. Lukshman J.B., Aged about 45 years, Guthi, Banakal Hobli, Mudigere Taluk, Chikkamagalur District – 18. ...Respondents (By Sri. Nasrulla Khan, HCGP for R1; Sri. Sudharshan L., Advocate for R2) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.5407/2016 on the file of II Addl. Civil Judge & JMFC at Hassan in so far as petitioners are concerned.
This Criminal petition coming on for Admission, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.4 and 5 in C.C.No.5407/2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 504, 323, 304B r/w 149 of IPC and Sections 3, 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. Petitioner No.1 is the brother-in-law and petitioner No.2 is the co-sister of the deceased Akshitha. The marriage of the deceased was performed with accused No.1 on 14.04.2016. On 22.05.2016 the deceased committed suicide by hanging in the matrimonial home. The father of the deceased lodged a complaint before respondent No.1-police on 23.05.2016. In the complaint he alleged that after marriage, his daughter and accused persons were living cordially. He specifically stated in the complaint that on account of some personal reasons the deceased committed suicide. In the said complaint, he did not even remotely mention about any ill-treatment meted out to the deceased in the matrimonial home either by the petitioners or by any other accused either in connection with dowry or for any reasons. However, in the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer recorded the further statement of the complainant and other witnesses. Charge- sheet has been laid against the petitioners herein as well as three other accused persons alleging that at the time of marriage, there was a demand for 250 grams of gold and a bike and cash of Rs.5,00,000/-. Out of which, on the date of the engagement, cash of Rs.2,00,000/- and 20 gram gold necklace and 26 grams bangles were given to the accused. Inspite of that, the accused persons ill-treated and harassed the deceased demanding additional dowry of Rs.3,00,000/- and 50 grams of gold. It is further stated that on account of her failure to satisfy the demand, the accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 assaulted her with hands and kicked her with legs and being unable to bear this cruelty and illegal demands made by the accused persons, the deceased committed suicide by hanging.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the allegations of dowry demand and cruelty are purely an after thought. No material has been collected by the prosecution in support of these accusations, except the self serving statements of the complainant and the other witnesses. The very fact that, the complainant and the said witnesses did not make out any allegations about the dowry demand or assault on the date of the incident or immediately thereafter, itself would indicate that these allegations are motivated to implicate all the members of the family out of spite and malice and therefore, the proceedings are liable to be quashed.
4. Refuting the aforesaid submissions, the learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the evidence collected by the prosecution prima-facie constitute the offences alleged in the charge-sheet. Merely on account of failure of the complainant to narrate the incident in the complaint cannot be a reason to quash the proceedings, especially when the investigation is completed and charge- sheet is laid against the petitioners. The learned counsel submits that the charge-sheet having been laid against the petitioners in view of the prima-facie materials collected in proof of the overt-acts committed by the petitioners, it is proper for the petitioners to seek for their discharge before the trial Court, rather than seeking to quash the said proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
5. On considering the submissions and on going through the charge-sheet, it is pertinent to note that the marriage of the deceased and accused No.1 was performed just one month earlier to the incident. In the complaint lodged by her father, he has specifically alleged that after marriage the deceased was living cordially with accused persons. If, in fact, there was any instance of cruelty or dowry demand as narrated in the charge sheet, the complainant would not have forgotten to mention these aspects in the complaint, especially when death had taken place within one-and-a-half month from the date of the marriage of the deceased. It is also significant to note that in the charge-sheet it is alleged that the deceased was assaulted and kicked by accused Nos.1 to 3, immediately, before the incident in question and the same was witnessed by the neighbours. If so, the incident certainly would have been reported to the complainant and same would have find a place in the complaint. On the other hand, the complainant did not even remotely mention about any injuries on the body of the deceased. Even the post- mortem report does not disclose the presence of any external injuries on the deceased, except, the ligature mark around the neck of the deceased.
6. From the above circumstances, it is clear that the allegations of assault and cruelty leveled against the petitioners are purely an after thought. Even assuming for the sake of argument that there was such an assault on the deceased, which according to the prosecution was the immediate provocation for the deceased to commit suicide, the petitioners herein cannot be held responsible for the said incident. There are no allegation whatsoever in so far as the petitioners herein are concerned that on the date of the incident or prior to that, the petitioners herein either assaulted or abused the deceased. General allegations are made in the charge sheet that all the accused persons demanded additional dowry from the deceased and on account of her failure to satisfy the said demand, she was subjected to ill-treatment and harassment by the accused. The complainant did not aver any specific instance of such cruelty in the complaint. Even in the charge-sheet and other materials produced along with the charge-sheet, no material is produced in proof of the specific instance of such cruelty or dowry demand by the petitioners. On the other hand, in the charge-sheet it is stated that the amount was paid into the hands of accused No.1. Therefore, even the said allegation cannot be related to the petitioners herein.
7. Having regard to the general allegations made against the petitioners and in view of the facts and circumstances discussed above, in my view, prosecution of the petitioners for the above offences is only illegal and an abuse of process of Court and therefore, it cannot be allowed to continue. The allegations made in the complaint even if accepted as true, in my view, do not make out any of the offences against the petitioners. The material on record do not indicate that the petitioners herein have given any provocation to the deceased to commit suicide. Hence, the prosecution of the petitioners would be baseless and if allowed to continue would work out as a tool of harassment and an abuse of process of Court.
Resultantly, the petition is allowed. Proceedings in C.C.No.5407/2016 pending on the file of the II Addl. Civil Judge & JMFC, Hassan, are quashed only in so far as the petitioners herein/accused Nos.4 and 5 are concerned.
Sd/- JUDGE SV