STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. GOVINDARAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the State is directed against the judgment and order dated 29th June, 2002 passed by the XII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore in S.C. No. 32/2009 acquitting the Respondents-Accused Nos. 1 to 3 of the charges levelled against them for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 304B of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act (for short 'D.P. Act').

(2.) The case of the prosecution in brief is that, Accused- 2 & 3 are the parents of Accused - 1. The deceased Smt. Manjula was married to Accused-1 and their marriage was solemnized on 30.4.1998. After the marriage, she started living in her matrimonial home with the accused. On 4.3.1999, the said Manjula sustained burn injuries in the house of the accused and immediately she was shifted to Nelamangala Hospital at the first instance and thereafter to Victoria Hospital at Bangalore. On receipt of the information from the Victoria Hospital, the PSI of the Victoria Hospital Police Station, recorded the statement of the injured Manjula as per Ex.P13 and in the said statement she disclosed that she caught fire accidentally while trying to put-off the kerosene stove after preparing the Tea. However, on the next day i.e., on 5.3.1999, further statement of the injured Manjula came to be recorded as per Ex.P20 by the PSI, wherein, she disclosed that, unable to bear harassment and cruelty meted-out to her by her husband and parents-in-law, she tried to commit suicide by dousing kerosene on her person and set herself ablaze, as a result, she sustained burn injuries. Based on this statement recorded as per Ex.P20, the police registered case in Crime No.38/1999 against the husband and parents-in-law of the deceased for the offences punishable under Sec. 498A of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 & 4 of the D.P. Act and investigation was taken-up. Subsequently, on 7.3.1999, the said Manjula succumbed to the bum injuries and thereafter, the offence punishable under Sec. 304B of Indian Penal Code was added to the case already registered. Thereafter, the dead body was subjected to post mortem examination. During investigation, the respondents accused were arrested and initially they were remanded to judicial custody and subsequently, they were enlarged on bail. After completing investigation, the police filed charge-sheet.

(3.) Before the learned Sessions Judge, the respondents-accused pleaded not guilty for the charges levelled against them and claimed to be tried. The prosecution, to bring home the guilt of the accused persons, examined P.W.1 to PW.27 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P.21 and produced Mos.1 to 5. The respondents accused denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against them during their examination under Sec. 313 of Code Criminal Procedure The accused did not choose to lead any defence evidence. The defence of the accused was one of total denial and that of false implication. It was also their case that the deceased sustained burn injuries accidentally and they have not committed any offence as alleged. The learned Sessions Judge after hearing both sides and on appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, by the judgment under appeal acquitted all the accused of all the charges levelled against them holding that the prosecution has utterly failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. The learned Sessions Judge was of the view that the prosecution has not placed any evidence to prove that the deceased Manjula was in a position to make any statement soon after she was brought to the hospital. It is under these circumstances, the learned Sessions Judge doubted the genuineness of Exs. P13 and P.20. The learned Sessions Judge has also noticed that the prosecution has not placed any other cogent and acceptable evidence to establish that prior to the marriage, the accused had made any demand for dowry and accepted the same either in cash or in kind. The learned Sessions Judge also noticed that the prosecution has not placed any evidence worthy of acceptance to establish that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment within the meaning of Sec. 498A of Indian Penal Code nor the ingredients of the offence punishable under Sec. 304-B have been established. In that view of the matter, the learned Sessions Judge held that the accused are not guilty of the charges levelled against them. It is against this judgment of acquittal, the State has presented this appeal.