AHAMMAD KUNHA Vs. MARIAMMA W/O MOHAMMAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeals have been filed against the judgment of conviction dated 22.08.2013 and order on sentence dated 24.08.2013, passed in SC No.74/2012 by the learned V Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Dakshina Kannada, Mangaluru, sitting at Puttur, D.K. (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'trial Court'), wherein it has acquitted accused No.1 Sulaiman @ Kedudaka Sulaiman for the offence punishable under section 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'D.P.Act') and Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code, 1860, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'IPC') and convicted accused No.1 for the offence punishable under section 302 and 201 of IPC; and it also acquitted Smt. Mariamma, Kairunnisa and Nafeesa, the accused Nos.2 to 4 for the offence punishable under sections 3 & 4 of D.P. Act and Sections 498A, 302 and 201 read with 34 of IPC.

(2.) The prosecution case has begun with the complaint said to have been filed by PW-1 Ahamad Kuii, father of the deceased before the respondent Police on 26.7.2011. The summary of the said complaint was that his third daughter Avvamma @ Ayisha, was given in marriage to accused No.1 in the year 2007, and she was subjected to cruelty by her husband, mother-in-law and sisters-in-law. On the morning of 26.7.2011, he received a telephone call from his relative informing that his daughter Avvamma @ Ayisha had fallen in a stream [1]/Thodu) in a place called Nalayidagundi. After hearing the information, he rushed to the said place, where they noticed the dead body of his daughter Avvamma @ Ayisha. The complainant alleged the illtreatment meted to the deceased by her husband, mother-in-law and sisters-in-law. The said complaint was registered by the Uppinangadi Police in Crime No.78/2011 against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of IPC. Subsequently, based on the further statement of the said complainant on 28.7.2011, the Investigating Officer incorporated Section 498A of IPC also in the crime. However, during the course of investigation, he has secured the evidences to show that the death of the deceased was un-natural and it was a dowry death, and therefore, the Investigating Officer on 23.10.2011 added Section 304B of IPC also.

(3.) Charges were framed. Since the accused pleaded not guilty, trial was held, wherein the prosecution in order to prove the alleged guilt against the accused, examined PWs.1 to 19 and got marked documents from Exs. P-1 to P-15 and Material Object MO-1. On behalf of the accused, no witnesses were examined, however, the documents at Exs. D-1 to D-5 were got marked.