STATE OF KARNATAKA BY VISHWANATHAPURA POLICE, DEVANAHALLI TALUK. BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY S.P.P., HIGH COURT, BENGALURU Vs. ANAND, S/O MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/ AT VISHWANATHAPURA GRAMA, KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is a delay of 23 days in filing the appeal. This appeal is hied by the Stale.

(2.) The appeal is directed against the acquittal of the accused for the offence punishable under Sec. 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC', for brevity). The case of the prosecution is that, Padma was the daughter of one Anjanappa and Rathnamma. The accused was the nephew of Rathnamma. About eight years prior to the incident, the accused had fallen in love with Padma and had got married against the wishes of his parents. However, Padma joined the accused in his home and they had two children thereafter. However, it is stated that the accused had the habit of drinking, on account of which he would ill-treat her whenever he was inebriated and this had led to frequent acrimony and there came a day and Padma left her matrimonial home and went away to her parent's house and she stayed there for about 15 days. This was just prior to the incident under which this case arises. On 27.08.2012, it transpires that Padma's parents persuaded her to go back to her matrimonial home and that she did return to the matrimonial home only to be faced with hostility, not only by the accused but also his parents. Thereafter she was found hanging at about 5.00 p.m. in her matrimonial home. PW-8, the father of the deceased, was informed late in the evening about his daughter's death and it is thereafter a complaint was lodged by Anjanappa, father of the deceased, alleging that the cause of his daughter's death was the constant harassment and abetment to commit suicide, which has compelled his daughter to commit suicide at the instance of the accused. It is on this complaint that further investigation was conducted and after further proceedings, the respondent stood trial and pleaded not guilty after the case was committed to the Sessions Court. It was thereafter that the prosecution had rendered evidence of 13 witnesses apart from marking several exhibits and material objects on the basis of which the Court below had framed the following points for consideration and answered the same in the negative:

(3.) In its reasoning by the Court below, it was found that PW-8 and PW-12, namely, the parents of the deceased were treated as material witnesses and therefore their evidence was recorded after examining other witnesses. PW-8 was treated as a hostile witness, since he did not support the case of the prosecution and was cross-examined at length by the prosecution. It is on account of this that the Court below has found that there was no evidence of the accused having abetted the commission of suicide by Padma or that he was ill-treating or torturing Padma. Similarly, PW-12 - the mother of Padma was also treated as a hostile witness and it is elicited in the course of her cross-examination that both she and her husband were not happy with the marriage of their son and that she was not on talking terms with Padma and therefore, the court below has found that there was more than one reason why Padma might have committed suicide, especially the hostility shown by the parents of the accused towards the deceased could be one other reason. The evidence of other witnesses is of a formal nature and has not really advanced the case of the prosecution. It is on this glaring lack of evidence that the accused has been acquitted.