GUDADAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor.

(2.) The appellant was accused of offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'I.P.C.', for brevity). The complainant was the wife of the appellant. It was her case that, they were married 12 years prior to the incident and that she was subjected to physical and mental cruelty and that the appellant suspected her chastity. They had three children by their marriage. It is on account of continued harassment and unable to bear the ill-treatment, she was driven to commit suicide by setting herself on fire in her house at Irakalagada, Koppal Taluk on the intervening night of 19.02.2007, at 1.30 a.m., on account of which, she sustained burn injuries. She had been shifted to Koppal District Hospital and for further treatment to KIMS Hospital, Hubli. But, she died under treatment on 07.04.2007 at 5.00 a.m. on account of the burn injuries. Therefore, it was alleged that the appellant had abetted the commission of suicide by the deceased and he was committed to the Sessions Court for trial.

(3.) The appellant having pleaded not guilty and having claimed to be tried, the prosecution had examined P.Ws.1 to 15 and had marked Exs.P1 to P17. The statement of the appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to 'Cr.P.C.', for brevity) and he had not chosen to tender any evidence. But had filed his written statement to claim that the wife was suffering from severe stomach ache for a long time and unable to bear the same, she had set herself on fire, and on hearing her cries, with the help of his relatives, he had shifted her to the Koppal District Hospital at 11.30 p.m. on 18.02.2007, but on medical advise, she was shifted to KIMS Hospital, Hubli. She was unconscious during the entire period. After she was admitted to KIMS Hospital, Hubli, he had come to Irakalagada to arrange for medical expenses to treat his wife, it was found that he was arrested by the police. It was denied by him that his wife was in a position to make any statement to the police, he having ill-treated the deceased during her life time. On the basis of the evidence and rival contentions, the Court below framed the following points for consideration: