V BHASKAR RAO Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) V.Bhaskar Rao, the father of the unfortunate deceased, who allegedly came to be roasted alive by her husband and in laws, is before this Court. This writ petition is an example as to how the functionary of the State not only miserably failed in discharging his statutory obligations, but also had taken sides with the offender to shield them by sealing the complaint of the petitioner over the death of his daughter.

(2.) Mrs.V.Sharada @ Sanjana is the only daughter of the petitioner. The petitioner belongs to Anjaneya Camp Post and Taluk, Maavi District, Raichur, Karnataka State. His daughter was given in marriage to one M.Ramesh, a resident of Tiruvottiyur, Chennai on 28.6.2002. The marriage was solemnized at the village of the petitioner as per Hindu rites and customs. Though the petitioner offered to give 120 grams of gold jewels at the time of marriage, bridegroom and his family members demanded a sum of Rs.2,50,000/-. The petitioner in fact gave a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- before the marriage to the said Ramesh. The bridegroom further insisted the petitioner to execute an agreement for due payment of the balance dowry amount of Rs.1,50,000/-, failing which the marriage would not take place. He would also insist a sale agreement to be executed on a Rs.100/- stamp paper by the grandmother of the bride as though the said Ramesh has paid Rs.1,50,000/- as advance for purchasing 1 acre 25 cents of agricultural land belonging to the grandmother for a sale consideration of Rs.1,75,000/-, though value of the land was higher. Only after execution of the sale agreement, the marriage was solemnized on the next day i.e., 28.6.2002. Immediately after the marriage, the said Ramesh and his family members started harassing the daughter of the petitioner to get the balance amount of dowry. The couple came to Chennai on 5.7.2002. Since the balance amount of dowry was not paid, the petitioner was not even allowed to speak to his daughter except once. On 20.7.2002, the petitioner received a phone call from the said Ramesh informing him that his daughter met with a fire accident due to leakage in the gas cylinder while she was preparing tea. The petitioner arrived at Chennai immediately on receipt of the said message on 21.7.2002 along with his family members. Neither the petitioner nor his family members were allowed to see the girl. The petitioner suspected the death of his daughter. The petitioner and his family members stayed in Thusali Maligai lodge, but they were closely monitored by some unidentified persons and their movements were restricted by them. With great difficulty the petitioner managed to contact his lawyer and a telegraphic complaint dated 23.7.2002 was sent to the Inspector of Police, Tiruvottiyur Police Station, Chennai complaining that his daughter was murdered for dowry and the death was not due to accident. The petitioner and his wife were taken to the office of Tahsildar, Fort Tondiarpet Taluk by one K.Ramsekar Rao and his wife Mrs.Baby Sarojini stating that they should collect the body after post-mortem and they should sign some papers. Only then they came to know that factually the daughter of the petitioner died in the early hours on 25.7.2002. The petitioner and his wife were asked to sign only for handing over the dead body. They were not enquired by the Tahsildar before any signature was taken and the Tahsildar even did not see the petitioner or his wife. After the post-mortem, the body was straightaway taken to Tiruvottiyur burial ground. Thereafter, the petitioner and his wife were forcibly taken to the lodge and were forced to sign four written papers by the said K.Ramsekar Rao and B.Bhaskar Rao and some others. Thereafter, the petitioner went to his native place with his family members and became seriously ill and was in fact hospitalized for a fortnight. He preferred a written complaint on 26.8.2002 to the Inspector of Police (Law and Order), H8 Tiruvottiyur Police Station, and the copies of the complaint were also sent to the Hon'ble Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, Commissioner of Police and the Deputy Commissioner of Police. The petitioner was not informed of any action taken in this regard. Since the death was within a period of one month, the Tahsildar, Tondiarpet or Ponneri ought to have conducted an enquiry as per G.O.Ms.488 Home (Courts-IA) Department dated 28.4.98. The petitioner approached the Tahsildar, Fort Tondiarpet Taluk on several occasions, but of no avail. The petitioner sent a representation to the District Collector, Chennai dated 29.8.2002. Even then no action was taken. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court for a direction to the respondents viz., the District Collector, Chennai, Tahsildar, Fort Tondiarpet Taluk, Chennai, the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Tiruvottiyur Range, Chennai and the Inspector of Police (Law and Order), H8, Tiruvottiyur Police Station, Chennai to perform their statutory duties in the manner known to law without any further delay to conduct proper and fair enquiry into the circumstances that had led to the death of the petitioner's only daughter.

(3.) Though all the respondents were served and Mr.S.Kandasamy, learned Special Government Pleader represents them, the first respondent, the District Collector and the third respondent, the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Tiruvottiyur Range alone have filed counter affidavits. In the counter affidavit of the first respondent it is stated that on receipt of information as to the incident, a case in F.I.R. No.1198 of 2002 was registered on 20.7.2002 at H8 Tiruvottiyur Police Station. The injured was taken to Apollo Hospital, Tondiarpet and a statement narrating the incident was recorded. No harassment meted out to the daughter of the petitioner was revealed in the statement. Further the enquiry was conducted on 25.7.2002. Since the death took place within a period of seven years from the date of marriage, the matter was referred to the Tahsildar, Tondiarpet for enquiry under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. The Tahsildar conducted enquiry and found the death was due to fire accident. The report was sent to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Ponneri, Tiruvallur District within whose jurisdiction the deceased family lastly resided. Since no officer is posted as Revenue Divisional Officer the matter could not be proceeded with.