M.G. PUTTASWAMY GOWDA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the appellant. I.A. 2/2012 is filed seeking special leave to appeal. The same is allowed. I.A. 1/2012 is filed seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal. For the reasons stated, the said application is also allowed.

(2.) THE complainant is aggrieved by the acquittal of the accused, namely one C.K. Ravikumar and one H.R. Ashish Gowda. It was the case of the prosecution that on 15.02.2009, the parents of one Anusha had gone to their Coffee Estate at Makodu. It is alleged that in the evening at about 5.15 p.m., Ravikumar had informed one Chandregowda over telephone stating that the daughter of Puttaswamy Gowda had committed suicide in her bedroom by hanging herself. It transpires that Puttaswamy Gowda and his wife returned and had broken open the door to reach their daughter who was hanging from the ceiling. It was suspected that the complainant - Puttaswamy Gowda believed that it was suicide and he did not know the reason why his daughter had committed suicide. A month later, it transpires that they had found a death note left behind by the deceased daughter and it is on the basis of the same that a case was lodged against the accused alleging that they were both pestering the deceased to respond to their wooing her and in the event that she failed to respond, they would bring harm to her and her family by throwing acid on her and her family members. This according to the death note left behind by the deceased was the main reason for her to have committed suicide, for the accused had tormented her to such an extent and had said that if she even mentioned the circumstance to her family, all of them would come to harm and unable to bear the pressure of such torture and harassment, she is said to have committed suicide, according to the note left behind by her. It is on that basis that a case was registered against the accused and they were brought to trial.

(3.) FROM a reading of the so -called death note left behind by the deceased, though it is also not in serious dispute that it is in her handwriting, the fact remains that in order to bring home the charge for an offence punishable under Section 306 IPC, it ought to be established that there was abetment by the accused, leading to the commission of suicide by the deceased. The allegations made against the accused would not indicate that there was any possible abetment at the commission of suicide by the accused. For, even if it was accepted as being a true circumstance, the deceased was not at the end of the road and she had several avenues by which she could have overcome the situation. The commission of suicide was not the only answer, nor could it be said that the accused had facilitated her to commit the act of suicide.