M. SATHEESH Vs. STATE AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the first accused in S.C.No.230 of 2013 on the file of the Mahila Court, Chennai. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Villivakkam Circle, Chennai has filed a final report in Crime No.590/ 2012 of Rajamangalam Police Station. The case of the prosecution is that the accused 1. Sathish (A1), 2. Kokilavathi (A2), 3. Harish (A3) demanded dowry and also tortured the deceased Anandi, which forced her to take an extreme step of committing suicide on 09.04.2012. Initially, a First Information Report in Crime No. 590 of 2012 of Rajamangalam Police Station was registered under section 174(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. After completing investigation, the Assistant Commissioner of Police laid a final report under Sections 498A, 304(B) of the Indian Penal Code against the accused.

(2.) The petitioner (A1) in his affidavit filed along with his petition has contended that he married Anandi on 22.05.2011 as per Hindu Rites and that his wife Anandi had severe abdominal pain, for which she was given treatment in various hospitals by him. His further contention is that since the CTC scan report showed that there was an obstruction in " pelvic urinary junction" and also certain internal growth, an operation was conducted on 11.08.2011 and that the deceased Anandi unable to bear the pain and sufferings, had committed suicide, leaving a suicide note by her bed side, which would reveal that there was no dowry harassment. According to him, though the police officials discovered the suicide note left by the deceased Anandi, they suppressed the same and the investigation is totally lopsided and biased. Another contention of the petitioner is that one Mr.Karthik used to contact his wife Anandi frequently through his mobile No.9543016202 and this was also informed to the police. It is his contention that on 09.04.2012, when he was in grief over the death of his wife, one Chellamuthu, Annakili and two other men bruttaly attacked him and his mother and the respondent police did not help them, even though the petitioner lodged a complaint with them.

(3.) Mr. C.Rajan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner(A1) drew the attention of this court to the medical reports of the deceased Anandi and submitted that the deceased Anandi had severe health problems, due to which she committed suicide and that the suicide note also would go to show that there was no demand for dowry. A xerox copy of the suicide note alleged to have been written by the deceased Anandi reads thus.