SATHYAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The sole accused in S.C. No. 105 of 1998 of the court of the Additional Sessions Judge-II, Mavelikkara is the appellant, who challenges his conviction and sentence imposed against him vide judgment dated 7.3.2003 of the trial court in the above sessions case. The prosecution case is that the accused married the deceased Sangetha on 7.9.1997 as per Hindu Religious rites and customs and thereafter they were living as man and wife and at that time, the accused illtreated the deceased both physically and mentally demanding dowry and due to the continuous harassment, the deceased returned to her parental house and at about 10 a.m. on 11.1.1998, she consumed poison and while she was undergoing treatment in the Government Hospital, Adoor, she died at about 12.30 p.m. on 11.1.1998. On the basis of the above allegation. Crime No. 9 of 1998 was registered in the Nooranadu Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 498A and 306 1.P.C.

(2.) On completing the investigation, the police had preferred report before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Mavelikkara based upon which CP. No. 14 of 1998 was instituted in the said court and the learned Magistrate by his order dated 8.7.1998 committed the case to the Sessions Court wherein the same is received as S.C. No. 10 of 1998 and subsequently, the case was made over to the trial court for disposal. Thus, when the accused appeared before the trial court after hearing the prosecution as well as the defence, a formal charge was framed against the accused for the offences punishable under Section: 498A and 3061.P.C. and when the said charge was read over and explained to the accused, he pleaded not guilty. Therefore, the prosecution adduced its evidence consisting of the oral testimonies of Pws.1 to 16 and Ext.P1 to P5. MOs.l to 5 were also identified and marked as material objects. Though there were no defence witnesses the defence has got marked Exts.D1 to D8 as defence exhibits. Where the prosecution evidence is over, the accused was questioned under Section 313 of Cr.P.C and he had denied the incriminating evidenc and circumstances which emerged during the prosecution evident and put to him. During the 313 examination, according to the accused, he did not demand anything as dowry and he purchased cents of property in the name of the deceased for a sale consideration of Rs. 50,000/- and out of that. Rs. 20,000/-was obtained by selling sovereigns of gold and he paid Rs. 30,000/- from his saving According to him, he had also obtained passport of the deceased and he had categorically stated that he was living with the deceased with peace and joy. According to him, after reaching at Gulf, he became ill and returned to his house and at that time, the deceased was along with her parents and on the same day of his arrival, he called the deceased to stay with him. But, the parents of the deceased did not permit her to reside with the accused. According to the accused, the Police Station, she had agreed to reside with him and on the next day, she died mysteriously and her death was not due to any harassment. After considering the entire evidence and material according to the Judge of the trial court, in assessing the evidence in its cumulative effect, he has to find that the accused subjected the deceased to cruelty with a view to get more property as dowry and the accused complained that the dowry brought by her is very low an asked her to bring more dowry. Thus, according to the learned Judge of the trial court, the above unlawful demand of dowry or property drive the woman to commit suicide and thus, the accused has committed the offence punishable under Section 498A of I.P.C. It has been further found that the marriage was on 7.9.1997 and she committed suicide on 11.1.1998 within four months of the marriage and the cruelty and harassment drive her to commit suicide and the accused, by willful act, abetted the commission of suicide and thus, the accused has committed the offence punishable under Section 306 of I.P.C. Accordingly, the accused is convicted for the offences mid-Sections 498A and 306 of I.P.C. On such conviction, the trial court has sentenced the accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for period of three years under Section 498A of I.P.C. and five year under Section 306 of I.P.C. The accused is also directed to pay compensation of Rs. 3 lakhs under Section 357(3) of Cr.P.C. for the offence under Section 498A and 306 I.P.C. and further ordered that compensation is realised, the same shall be disbursed to Pw 1 and It is also directed that the sentence shall run concurrently. It is the above finding, order of conviction and sentence and the direction pay compensation are challenged in this appeal.

(3.) I have heard Sri.R.Padmakumar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Smt. Lousy, the learned Public Prosecutor for the State.