TILOTAMA MISHRA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision petition is filed challenging the Order passed by the trial Court in S.C. No.1123/2014 dated 05.09.2015 for having rejected the application filed by accused Nos.2 and 4 i.e., petitioners herein under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. seeking for their discharge from the offences charged against them under Sections 498(A) and 304(B) of IPC r/w. Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'D.P. Act' for short].

(2.) The factual matrix of this petition are as under:

(3.) Learned counsel Sri. Rajendra C. Desai for the petitioners contended that based upon the complaint filed by the informant said to be the cousin sister of the deceased, the crime came to be registered for the offence punishable under Sections 498(A) and 304(B) of IPC, besides Sections 3 and 4 of the D.P. Act. Whereas, the complainant who is said to be the cousin sister of the deceased never been to the house of accused No.1 and so also never contacted them at any point of time and she has not even familiar with the family members of the accused. Though the complainant is not knowing the altercations said to be taken between the deceased and her husband, who is arrayed as accused No.1 as well as other accused but, the entire complaint is based upon the theory set up to rope the accused in the alleged crime. Whereas, FIR is said to be recorded for the offences under Section 498(A) of IPC though in a remote chances to see the ingredients which collected by the Investigating Officer, which does not constitute an offence punishable under Section 498(A) of IPC against these accused Nos.2 and 4 and also for the offence under Sections 304(B) of IPC as the death caused within the span of 7 years from the date of the marriage. But, the ingredients relating to the aforesaid offences lugged against the accused do not constitute any offence in respect of these accused Nos.2 and 4 as they are residing away from the scene of crime. The complainant said to be the cousin sister of the deceased and she has not seen commission of the offences as narrated in the complaint as well as in the substance of the charge-sheet. But, the entire complaint is based upon the hear say statements and also after thought relating to the alleged crime that these accused were caused the death of Sowmya Kar at the instigation of her husband i.e., accused No.1.