STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. PARASAPPA BHIMAPPA BISIROTTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard this appeal on the last two dates of hearing and after doing so, we were of the view that unfortunately, as far as the main charges are concerned, that the evidence led by the prosecution does not satisfy the requisite ingredients that are required to be established and that consequently, as regards the offences punishable Under Sections 498-A and 304b, I. P. C. , that it would not be possible to upset the order of acquittal. We need to however observe that we are not at all satisfied with the manner in which the Judicial Officer presiding over the Trial Court has dealt with this case. It is high time that the Judicial Officers, particularly, at the level of sessions Judges grasp the gravity of these offences and their social repercussions and stop taking these cases lightly. The same applies to the Prosecutor who conducted the proceeding who had done a wretched and unprofessional job.

(2.) AS far as the charge Under Section 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act is concerned, having regard to the oral evidence and Ex. P2, it is conclusively established that Rs. 4,500/- plus the gold ornaments weighing two tolas had been given to accused Nos. 1 and 3. In view of the provisions of the Section 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, and on the basis of the submissions canvassed by the respondents' learned Advocate, we are of the view that if the accused Nos. 1 and 3 deposit the cash amount of Rs. 4,500/- and the gold ornaments weighing two tolas with the trial Court within a period of eight weeks i. e. two months from today in which case, there would be no need to disturb the order of acquittal under the provisions of the Dowry Prohibition Act. There are several reasons - why we have afforded this option to the accused, one of them being because this Court considered it more necessary that this obnoxious social practice be reversed and stamped out rather than that people be mechanically punished. We have also taken into account many other factors pointed out by the respondents' learned Advocate including the status of the accused etc. We however make it clear that, if there is any default on the part of the accused that the Trial Court shall report the same back to this Court, in which case this Court will have no option except to straighaway convict the accused persons. It is in their own interest not to invite any such orders.

(3.) WITH the above said directions, this criminal appeal which has been heard by us on merits to stand disposed of.