IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 373 / 2016 BETWEEN The State of Karnataka By Bharathinagar Police Bengaluru, represented by State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka Bengaluru – 560005.
(By Sri. Tejas, HCGP) AND 1. Anshu Teri S/o S K Teri Aged about 51 years R/at 155/10 FMME Military Quarters St. John’s Road Bharathinagara Bengaluru.
2. Sudharshan Kumar Teri S/o Late S N Teri Aged about 71 yeas 3. Smt. Saroja W/o Sudharshan Kumar Teri Aged about 68 years ... Petitioner Respondents No.3 and 4 are R/at No.K20, Income Tax Colony Tank Road, Durgapura Jaipura, Rajasthan - 302018.
... Respondents (By Sri. Siji Malayil, Advocate for R-1 to R-3) This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to set aside the judgment passed by the XLV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore in S.C. No. 1541/2013 dated 21.12.2015 discharging the Respondents of the offences punishable under Sections 498(A) and 306 r/w 34 of IPC and dismiss the application filed by the Respondent No.1 to 4 (Accused No.1 to 4) under Section 227 of Cr.P.C., and allow the above Crl. RP.
This Criminal Revision Petition Coming on for Admission, this day, the court made the following:
ORDER Heard learned HCGP for the State and learned counsel for the respondents.
2. This petition is preferred by the State challenging the order dated 21.12.2015 passed by the Court below in S.C.No.1541/2013 discharging the respondents/accused Nos.2 to 4 of the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 306 read with Section 34 of IPC.
3. The factual matrix of the petition is that the accused persons alleged to have given physical and mental harassment to the deceased due to which she committed suicide. Accused No.1 is the son of the deceased and he was addicted to bad vises and due to that influence, he used to abuse the deceased by saying as to go and die. Accused No.2 is the husband and Accused Nos.3 and 4 are the in-laws of the deceased. The deceased is said to have suffering from mental disease as a result of which she has jumped from the building and committed suicide. Subsequent to the death of the deceased, based upon the report filed by her brother, the case initially was registered as UDR and subsequent to recording of statement of witnesses during the course of inquest proceeding over the dead body, crime came to be registered. Subsequently, the case was taken up for investigation by the IO and the IO laid the chargesheet before the committal court. Consequently, the committal court passed an order committing the case to the Court of Sessions for trial and accordingly, S.C.No.1541/2013 was registered and pending before the CCH-46 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 306 read with Section 34 of IPC.
4. Accused Nos.1 to 4 entered appearance through their counsel and filed an application under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. to discharge from the offences leveled against them. The trial Court by order dated 21.12.2015 partly allowed the said application discharging Accused Nos.2 to 4 and rejected the application in respect of accused No.1.Hence, this petition by the State.
5. Learned HCGP for the State and learned counsel for the respondents submit that the case in S.C.No.1541/2013 is in progress and considerable statements of witnesses have been recorded and so also, relevant documents have been got exhibited on the part of the prosecution. But however, accused Nos.2 to 4 have been discharged from the offences leveled against them as there is no specific overt act attributed against them and the same is based upon the charge sheet laid by the IO. But the trial Court held that there is prima facie case made out against accused No.1 who is said to be the son of deceased so as to attract the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 306 of IPC. Therefore, it is deemed proper at this stage no detail discussion is required while considering the present petition.
6. It is relevant to refer that when the case in SC No.1541/2013 is under process for facing of trial of accused No.1 and considerable evidence has been let in, this petition does not hold any substance for intervention of the impugned order passed by the trial Court.
7. In terms of the aforesaid reasons and findings, I am of the considered opinion that this petition deserves to be rejected, and accordingly rejected. Consequently, the order dated 21.12.2015 passed by the trial Court in S.C.No.1541/2013 insofar as it relates to discharging accused Nos.2 to 4, is hereby confirmed.
8. As the matter is of the year 2013, the trial Court is directed to expedite the matter in respect of Accused No.1 and shall dispose of the entire case within an outer limit of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The trial Court shall give an opportunity to both the parties to proceed with the matter, in accordance with law.
DKB Sd/- JUDGE