S T DAYANANDA REDDY Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE first of these appeals has been preferred by the original accused No. 1 in S. C. No. 75/93 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Chitradurga assailing the correctness of the conviction and sentence awarded to him. The second of the two appeals has been preferred by the State assailing the acquittal of original accused Nos. 1 to 3 on the remaining charges under which the trial Court has acquitted them. The prosecution alleged that on 27-2-1993 the body of Shanthamma, the wife of accused No. 1 was found in a well in the land belonging to Venkatashivareddy within the jurisdiction of Imangala Police Station. An F. I. R. was lodged on the same day at about 9. 30 AM. which is Ex. P. 11 whereby it was alleged that the death in question was dowry related and consequently, the police registered an offence and commenced investigation. It is alleged that in the course of the investigation it transpired that Shantamma was married to accused No. 1 on 25-5-1989 and that pursuant to the negotiations that took place, a gold ring with initial was given to A-1, Rs. 15,000/- in cash was given to the father A-2 and that a chain with locket, jumki, bendole, one pair of bangles, a watch and silver leg chain were given to the bride Shanthamma. The prosecution alleged that this was a case in which dowry had been demanded and accepted and consequently,the trial Court had framed charges against the accused for offences under Ss. 3, 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act as also under S. 498 (A) r/w. 34, IPC. and S. 304 (B) r/w. 34, IPC. in respect of the acts of cruelty to which Shanthamma had been subjected to as also in relation to the death of Shanthamma which was alleged to have been a result of dowry related cruelty. It was alleged by the prosecution that the accused persons had originally demanded dowry of Rs. 40,000/- and it was agreed upon that the dowry was settled at Rs. 30,000/- and 8 tolas of gold. The prosecution theory was that because of the non-payment of the balance dowry amount of Rs. 15,000/- that Shanthamma was treated badly that she was assaulted and abused and that she was subjected to various forms of torture both physically and mentally over a period of time and that she was finally driven to suicide because of this cruelty and torture. It has come on record that in the course of the marriage Shanthamma delivered two children, the second one hardly three months before the incident and the allegation further is to the effect that the husband A-1 not only illtreated her but that he subjected her to further agony and anguish because he was given to playing cards and gambling, that he would spend all his time with his friends and in the company of others and the wife had reason to believe that he had also indulged in extra marital relationship and furthermore that he had even made certain imputations against her character as emerges from the letter Ex. P. 1. The further allegation against A-1 was to the effect that because of his gambling habits that he had even disposed of some of the ornaments that belonged to his wife Shanthamma. In sum and substance, this is one more of the cases where the charge is that because of the dowry related harassment and torture that the wife finally committed suicide.

(2.) THE learned trial Judge on a careful examination of the record before him recorded the finding that the charges under the Dowry Prohibition Act had not been substantiated but at the same time, the trial Court recorded the finding that the acts of cruelty stood established as far as the husband A-1 is concerned and consequently convicted him of the offence punishable under S. 498 (A), IPC. and sentenced him to two years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1000/- under this charge. The trial Court also held A-1 guilty of the offence punishable under S. 306, IPC. and awarded a sentence of four years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2000/- under this charge. It is against this conviction and sentence that the accused No. 1 Dayananda has preferred Crl. A. 214/95 whereas the State has appealed by way of Crl. A. 452/95 against the acquittal under the remaining charges. We have heard the two appeals together and purpose to dispose of them through a common judgment.

(3.) THE principal submission canvassed on behalf of the State in Crl. A. 452/95 is that the trial Court was clearly in error in having acquitted the accused of the offences punishable under Ss. 3, 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in the face of the clear cut evidence of Shanthamma's brother PW. 1 and the mother who is PW. 2. The learned Govt. Advocate submitted that these two persons who are family members have in terms recounted the fact that Rs. 40,000/- was originally demanded as dowry and because of the inability of the girl's side to meet with this demand that they ultimately agreed to reduce it to Rs. 30,000/- and 8 tolas of gold. The two witnesses have also indicated the items of jewellery that were given in lieu of the gold and the sources from where the amount of Rs. 15,000/- in cash was handed over to accused No. 2 who is the father of A-1. It was pointed out to us that even though this position has been seriously disputed that there was no ground on which the trial Court could have rejected this evidence and the further contention raised was that even on the question of probabilities this Court ought to have accepted the evidence as far as these charges are concerned. On the other hand, learned Advocate Mr. Adi who represents the respondent-accused pointed out to us that as far as the State's appeal against the acquittal is concerned, that the essential principle which this Court must follow is the well settled position in law that applies to all such appeals against acquittals namely that where all the evidence has been considered and where the trial Court has recorded findings that are logical and which proceeded on a fair and correct appreciation of the evidence and where the trial Court has proceeded in consonance with the well defined principles of law that merely because some other view may be canvassed in appeal that it is no ground for interference. As far as this head of charge is concerned, we did very carefullyapply our minds to the well defined position in law for purposes of assessing whether from the discussions and findings recorded in the judgment of the trial Court any error or possible miscarriage of justice has occurred and having rechecked the position from the evidence, we need to record that as far as the charges under the Dowry Prohibition Act are concerned, the findings of the trial Court require to be confirmed.