KRISHNA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner - accused under Section 397 of Code of Criminal Procedure ('Cr.P.C.' for short) challenging the order of framing of charge by the FTC, Bhadravathi in S.C.No.145/2009 against the petitioner/accused for the offences under Sections 498-A, 302 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code ('IPC' for short).

(2.) The ranks of the parties are referred to as in the trial Court for the sake of convenience.

(3.) The factual matrix of the case of the prosecution in brief is that: complainant-Kariyappa filed a compliant before the Bhadravathi Old Town Police on 28.12.1998 alleging that his daughter Mangala was given in marriage with accused No.1-Krishna about 9 years back and they have two children. Accused No.1 along with other accused used to ill treat his daughter by demanding dowry. They used to hurt her physically and mentally by demanding dowry inspite sufficient dowry given to her while performing marriage. Prior to the incident, there was quarrel between his daughter and accused No.1 and his daughter had come back to maternal home and thereafter, complainant himself took his daughter and left her in her matrimonial home. Later, he came to know that his daughter was not found and missing from the house of the accused from 30.10.1998 onwards, which fact came to his knowledge through one of his relative. Thereafter the complainant filed a missing complaint before the police. Later a case was registered as Crime No.241/1998 for the offences under Section 498-A of IPC. The police arrested the accused persons. After investigation filed charge sheet under Section 498-A IPC. After framing of the charge against the accused, they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Later the prosecution examined the complainant as PW-1, his wife Smt. Venkatamma as PW-2, complainant's another daughter, Ms.Saroja as PW-4. Another son of the accused Sri.Shreekanth was examined as PW-3, who turned hostile. Chaitunneesa, examined as PW-5 also turned hostile. During recording of evidence of PWs 1, 2 and 4, they have stated before the Magistrate that prior to missing of Mangala (Victim), the accused had threatened the complainant that he would kill his daughter, if he does not take his daughter back. However, his daughter was staying in the house of accused and later, from 30.10.1998 his daughter was found missing and he lodged a detailed complaint with the police that due to ill treatment by the accused, his daughter was missing and subsequently, when they came to know that a dead body was found in Shanthisagar lake, himself and his wife went to the spot. By the time they could reach the spot, police had buried the body and stated to have shown photographs of the dead body of a woman. Body was decomposed, but the complainant identified the blouse worn by the lady shown in the photograph saying that it was given to her by one of his relative. PW-2, wife the complainant and PW-4, another daughter of the complainant were given evidence that the accused might have killed Mangala, the victim, and thrown the dead body in the lake.