CHANDRAKANTH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.1 in Crime No.113/2015, which appears to have been culminated in charge sheet.

(2.) The brief factual matrix of the case are that, the wife of the petitioner by name Nagamma has lodged a complaint on 08.06.2015 while she was in the Mann Ekheli Government Hospital, wherein she has stated that the marriage between herself and the petitioner was taken place about ten years ago and they were blessed with three children. It is also alleged that petitioner and his family members were illtreating and harassing the deceased for various reasons. In this background, it is alleged that on 08.06.2015 at about 7:00 p.m. when they were taking their dinner at that time the husband and wife started quarreling and abusing her. It is alleged that the petitioner started abusing her in filthy language and in fact, she was frustrated due to that act of the petitioner and she wanted to commit suicide, therefore she was pouring kerosene on herself at that time the husband has lit the match stick and put her on fire, by saying that she has to die. Subsequently it appears she was also shifted to the Gandhi hospital in Secunderabad, there on the request of the Hyderabad Police learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM) had been to the hospital and recorded the dying declaration of the deceased Nagamma. Earlier this particular dying declaration was not made available to the Court in spite of repeated directions issued by this Court, ultimately learned Addl. SPP made available a copy of the said dying declaration today. On perusal of the same it disclosed that, the deceased had categorically stated that on that particular day her husband quarreled with her and poured kerosene on her and lit fire. Therefore, she sustained injuries. It appears subsequently she succumbed to the burn injuries. Though there is some light difference in the statement of the victim compared to the first information report, nevertheless she has consistent with regarding liting of fire by her husband and such strong prima facie grounds, are available in my opinion it is not a fit case to enlarge the petitioner. Hence the petition deserves to be dismissed and accordingly it is dismissed.

(3.) Some of the events taken place before this Court has in fact disturbed the mind of the Court. It is relevant to note here that on earlier occasions this Court has directed the learned High Court Government Pleader to assist the Court by producing dying declaration recorded by the jurisdictional magistrate. In spite of taking time, he could not able to produce that document. On the other hand a detailed objections have been filed on 28.03.2016, today wherein at paragraph Nos. 3 and 4, the learned High Court Government Pleader has vividly narrated the steps taken by him to secure the said dying declaration and request made by him to the jurisdictional police including the Dy.S.P. to assist the prosecution to place all the materials before the Court. In fact he has explained is inability to produce such document because of the non-cooperation by the jurisdictional police including the Dy.S.P. The said paragraphs in the objection statement reads thus;