BHASKAR RAMAPPA MADAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court allowing the appeal filed by the respondent-State of Karnataka. Said Criminal appeal was filed under Section 378(1) and (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the Code). The learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Dharwad, directed acquittal of the present appellants who faced trial for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 304-B, 306, 498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the IPC).

(2.) The prosecution version in a nutshell is as follows : The accused No.1 is the husband of Ratnavva (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) who was given in marriage to the accused No.1 about 1 1/2 years prior to her death and during their marriage, the accused No. 1 was given 11 tolas of gold and a cash of Rs. 10,000/- along with other utensils. In spite of all this, the accused were ill-treating and harassing the deceased Ratnavva coercing her to bring more dowry and accordingly a cheque of Rs. 10,000/- was given to the accused No. 1 by the mother of the deceased. But in spite of that the accused did not stop the ill-treatment, and harassment to the deceased Ratnavva. On account of constant harassment and ill-treatment to the deceased, they made the life of the deceased a miserable one which abetted the deceased to commit suicide. The accused No. 1 is the husband of the deceased, the accused Nos.2 and 3 are the parents-in-law, the accused Nos.4 and 5 are the sisters-in-law and the accused No. 6 is the brother-in-law of the deceased. On the basis of information lodged, investigation was undertaken and on completion thereof chargesheet was filed. As accused persons pleaded innocence, trial was held. In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution has examined at the trial PWs.1 to 18 and got marked in evidence Ex.P1 to P15 and MOs.1 to 12. Investigation was undertaken. The trial Court held that the Investigating Officer should not have proceeded with the investigation as he was the complainant and on that ground held the prosecution version to be tainted. It also found that the evidence of the witnesses did not inspire confidence. Acquittal was challenged before the High Court, which on the other hand held that the conclusions of the trial Court are erroneous.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the High Court nowhere recorded a finding that the conclusions of the trial Court were either perverse or not Suppl orted by reasons.