IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1094/2014 BETWEEN STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THALAGHATTAPURA POLICE 560 050 (BY SRI.VISHWAMURTHY, HCGP) AND 1. NARASIMHAMURTHY S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA, AGED 34 YEARS, 2. CHIKKAHANUMAKKA W/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA, AGED 67 YEARS, ... APPELLANT BOTH ARE R/AT CHURCH ROAD, GUBBALALA, UTHARAHALLI HOBLI, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK-560 050 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. A N RADHAKRISHNA, ADV. FOR R1 NOTICE ISSUE TO R2 THROUGH SP BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT) THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.378(1) AND (3) CR.P.C PRAYING TO GRANT LEAVE TO FILE AN APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED:25.8.2014 PASSED BY THE FTC-III, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE IN S.C.NO.158/2012 - ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A, 306 R/W 34 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Though the matter is listed for orders, with the consent of both the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. Respondent No.2, who is accused No.2 before the trial court expired and therefore, proceedings as against respondent No.2 is already abated.
2. The appellant-State has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the judgment and order of acquittal dated 25.8.2014 passed by the FTC-III, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru in S.C.158/2012.
3. The brief case of the prosecution before the court below is that accused No.1, the husband of deceased Ramya, daughter of CW-1, Chikkaswamy s/o Chikkegoweda had loved and married the deceased during the year 2009 and thereafter accused Nos.1 and 2 subjected her to cruelty both physically and mentally till her death i.e., 8.1.2012 and thereby both the accused have committed offences punishable under Section 498A read with Section 34 of IPC.
4. Deceased Ramya committed suicide on 8.1.2012 before 2.00 p.m. by hanging herself to the ceiling fan by her veil in the house, within the jurisdiction of the Thalagattapura Police. After conducting investigation, the police have filed charge sheet against both the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 306 read with 34 of IPC. After hearing both the sides, charges were framed by the concerned trial court. During the course of the trial, accused No.2, mother of accused No.1 died and case against her stood abated. Accused No.1 pleaded that he is not guilty and he has been tried. When the matter was posted for trial, the prosecution in support of its case, in all examined 10 witnesses as PWs-1 to 10 and got marked 5 documents as Ex.P-1 to 5 and so also got marked material objects as M.Os.1 and 2. On the side of the defence no witness were examined nor any documents were got marked. After hearing both the sides, the learned Judge of the trial court acquitted accused No.1 for the said offence. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order of acquittal and also challenging the legality and correctness of judgment of acquittal, the State is before this Court and preferred the appeal.
5. Heard the arguments of learned HCGP appearing for the State and learned counsel for respondent No.1/accused No.1. I have perused the grounds urged in the appeal memorandum, judgment and order of acquittal passed by the court below and also considered the oral submissions made by the learned counsel on both the sides at bar.
6. According to the prosecution, the deceased Ramya and accused No.1 married each other and it was a love marriage and after marriage, deceased went to lead her life in her matrimonial house. During her stay in the said house of the accused, both the accused used to harass and give ill treatment to her both physically and mentally and because of that reason, the deceased committed suicide.
7. Looking into materials placed on record, it goes to show that after marrying accused No.1, deceased came to know that accused No.1 was already married and he was having two wives and she was the third wife. Therefore, it is the defence of the accused persons during the course of trial that the deceased after coming to know about accused No.1 being already married and having two wives was disappointed in life and that was the reasons for her to commit suicide.
8. Looking into the oral evidence of the prosecution witness i.e., the evidence of the parents and brother of the deceased supported the case of the prosecution. As deposed by the investigating Officer himself, he has not recorded the statement of the neighbors, therefore, there are no neighbouring witnesses in the case. Even looking into the evidence of the parents of the deceased, there is no consistency in the evidence. The father of the deceased has deposed that both the accused used to give ill treatment to his daughter and she used to inform him over the phone. That being so, the investigating officer has failed to collect the call details of the telephonic conversation. It is no doubt true that the father deposed in his evidence that his daughter used to inform him over the phone that both the accused persons used to give ill treatment to her, but considering the death note left by the deceased, wherein it is stated that accused No.2, the mother-in-law of the deceased used to give ill treatment to her. The death note is marked not in the document series but as material object as M.O.2. If the death note is considered along with the oral evidence of the father of the deceased, it is clear that the ill treatment is by accused No.2 and so far as accused No.1 is concerned, there is no such allegation. Accused No.2, mother-in- law of the deceased expired and therefore, the case against accused No.2 stood abated. So it has to be considered only as against accused No.1. If the oral evidence of father of the deceased given on oath is taken into consideration that the deceased left death note alleging that accused No.2 used to harass and give ill treatment, the contents of the death note are given contrary to the oral evidence of the father of the deceased. Therefore, there is no consistency in the case of the prosecution if the evidence of the prosecution witnesses are taken into consideration.
9. All these aspects were considered and appreciated properly by the court below and the court below has rightly come to the conclusion in holding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt. The judgment and order of acquittal is in accordance with materials placed on record. I do not find any infirmity or illegality in the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the court below. Therefore, there is no valid and justifying grounds for this court to interfere with the same. There is no merit in the appeal.
Accordingly, the appeal is hereby dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE DM