SATHISHA BASAVANNEPPA SUNAGAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Present appeal has been preferred by the appellant-accused being aggrieved by the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 17th March 2010 passed by the II Additional Sessions and Special Judge, Dharwad, in Special (S.C. & S.T.) CC No.21 of 2009.

(2.) Brief facts of the prosecution case are that the complainant/PW-1, who was working as a woman constable in Amasebail Police Station, Udupi district, was undergoing training at Police Training School, Dharwad from 012002 to September 2003, at that time, she came in contact with the accused, who was working as a Police Constable in District Armed Reserve at Dharwad. Thereafter, some affair developed between them and they were also moving around. They had also come to a conclusion that they should get married. After completion of the training, PW-1 left Dharwad and she returned back to Udupi. After coming to know of the fact that the accused resiled from the promise and married another girl, she came to Dharwad on 01.07.2009 along with PW-2 to ask the accused and the said effort went in vain. Again on 007.2009, when she was proceeding along with PW-2 to go to the house of the accused, at about 8.00 or 8.30 p.m., when they were moving on the footpath in front of The Presentation School at Dharwad, at that time, the accused, who was coming on a motor cycle from the opposite direction, stopped the vehicle on seeking the complainant. When PW-1 asked the accused to marry, the accused refused by stating that she belongs to a caste of marati naik and the members of his family will boycott him if he marries her. There were some exchange of words between the complainant and the accused. At about 8.30 p.m., the accused pulled her hair, slapped and abused her taking the name of her caste and also threatened her with dire consequences. On the next day, i.e. on 03.07.2009, the accused came and handed over her an amount of Rs.50,000/-. After receiving the said amount, PW1/complainant went back to Udupi and after consultation with the elders, she filed a complaint. After investigation, a charge sheet was laid as against the accused. Thereafter, the Special Court took cognizance and secured the presence of the accused and after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the accused, framed charges. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

(3.) In order to prove the case of the prosecution, the prosecution got examined PWs.1 to 18 and got marked Exs.P-1 to P-44. The statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded by putting the incriminating materials against him. The accused denied the said incriminating materials. He did not lead any evidence. After hearing the parties to the lis, the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence is passed wherein the accused was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504 and 506 part-I of the Indian Penal Code. In for as the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1989, is concerned, the accused was acquitted.