BYREGOWDA M.C. Vs. NAGARAJA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The judgment and order of acquittal dated 3.7.2012 passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Chikmagalur in S.C. No. 143/2010 is called in question in this appeal by the father of the deceased namely, Sri. M.C. Byregowda (PW.1). The State has not preferred appeal questioning the order of acquittal.

(2.) Case of the prosecution in brief is that the deceased Meena is the daughter of PW.1 - Byregowda (the appellant herein); marriage between the deceased Meena and accused was performed on 22.8.2004 as per Hindu custom; three months prior to the marriage, marriage negotiation took place between the family members of the accused as well as the deceased; in the said negotiation, neither the deceased nor the accused participated, only family members of the accused and the deceased had participated; during the marriage negotiation, the elders of the accused demanded an amount of Rs. 50,000/ - in cash, a motor cycle and 100 grams of gold; however, the father of the deceased (appellant herein) agreed to pay Rs. 65,000/ - in cash, 12 grams of gold chain and one ring to the accused and some ornaments to his daughter; on the date of negotiation, an amount of Rs. 15,000/ - was paid to the father of the accused; the Betrothal ceremony was performed after twenty days of the marriage negotiation, wherein the relatives and friends of both the families were present; on that day PW.9 - Vishwanath paid Rs. 50,000/ - to the father of the accused Somashekharappa; the marriage was performed at the temple in the village and at the time of the marriage, the parents of the deceased gave gold ring and chain to the accused and one pair of ear -rings, one neck chain and necklace to the deceased; the deceased and accused lived happily for three to four months after the marriage; thereafter, problems were cropped up between the deceased and the accused; however, two children were born out of the wedlock, one child was aged about 5 years and another child was aged about 1 1/2 years, at the time of the incident.

(3.) In order to prove its case, the prosecution in all has examined 21 witnesses and got marked 17 Exhibits and 3 Material Objects. On behalf of the defence, no witness is examined.