GOBRU Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner/accused No.1 in Criminal Case No.247/2019 (arising out of Crime No.9/2019, of Kunchavaram Police Station), pending before the learned Prl.J.M.F.C., Court, Chincholi, has filed this petition seeking his enlargement on bail under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'Cr.P.C.'), for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304B read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'IPC') and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'D.P.Act').

(2.) The summary of the case of the prosecution is that the marriage between accused No.1 and deceased Taribai, was conducted on 19.2.2019. She met with an unnatural death on 31.3.2019, which according to the medical report produced by the prosecution is due to consumption of organo- phosphorus insecticide. The mother of the deceased is the complainant in this case who has alleged in the complaint that, soon after her daughter's marriage, that too, not even beyond ten days, the accused who are the husband and father-in-law of deceased-Taribai were pestering her to bring the balance dowry amount of Rs.40,000/-. In the process, they are said to have pledged three tolas of gold said to have been given as a part of dowry in a Bank and availed a loan of Rs.42,000/-. It is in that connection, on 30.3.2019, deceased Taribai is said to have gone to her mother's house along with her husband with a request to pay for the balance amount of Rs.40,000/-. However, the mother, who is the complainant herein, would not able to arrange for the balance amount. By pacifying them, the deceased was sent back to her husband's house. On the very next day i.e., on 31.3.2019, at about 11.00 a.m., the complainant came to know that the deceased Taribai had consumed poison. Even according to the complainant, the husband of the deceased, who is the petitioner herein, complainant and others shifted Tarabai to a hospital, where she lost her breath on the same evening at about 7.28 p.m. The complainant alleges that it was due to the harassment for dowry by the accused, including the present petitioner, her daughter met with an unnatural death. After completing the investigation, the respondent-police have filed the charge sheet for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 304B read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of D.P.Act.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits in his argument that the reason for the alleged suicide of the deceased Taribai is not the demand for dowry, but, she was disappointed when three tolas of gold given to her in her marriage was pledged in a Bank by her husband and father-in-law for availing a loan of Rs.42,000/-. It is for that act, she has committed suicide, as such, there is no nexus between her death and alleged dowry harassment. He further submitted that there appears to be no direct allegation made against the accused stating that he demanded dowry either with the complainant or anyone member in the parental home of the deceased.