SURESH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal has been directed against the Judgment and conviction dated 06.10.2017 passed in S.S.C.No.66 of 2014 by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge (P.C.R) Thanjavur, Thanjavur District convicting and sentencing the appellant / accused as follows:-

(2.) The case of the prosecution in brief is that the appellant/accused belongs to a Backward Class Community and the deceased Seethalakshmi belongs to a Scheduled Caste Community. The appellant/accused and the deceased were in love with each other for two years prior to the date of occurrence. On 18.04.2013, the appellant/accused had taken the deceased to Coimbatore and stayed there for ten days and on 28.04.2013 returned from Coimbatore and reached Aduthurai. After reaching Aduthurai, the appellant/accused refused to marry the deceased on the ground she belongs to Scheduled Caste community and had under the threat of murdering her parents taken a letter from the deceased stating that there is no connection between them. Thereafter, the appellant/accused had dropped the deceased at Kuthalam and left away and thereby the appellant/accused had cheated the deceased on the promise of marriage and later refused to marry her on the ground of caste. The deceased had reached home on 28.04.2013 at 06.30 p.m and informed her parents about the appellant/accused taking a letter from her under threat and the refusal of the appellant/accused to marry her. On the next day, i.e., on 29.04.2013 at around 11.30 a.m, the deceased had gone to the house of her relative one Chinnayan and immolated herself when nobody was in the house. The deceased was taken to the Government Hospital, Kumbakonam and she died at 16.15 hours while under treatment. Further, as per the prosecution, a statement had been recorded from her by the respondent police based on which, a case in Cr.No.126/2013 was registered for the offences under Sections 417 , 420 , 309 , 506(ii) IPC r/w Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment to Women Act and under Section 3(1) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989. After the registration of the case, the respondent took up the case for investigation and after completion of investigation, filed the final report against the appellant/accused for the offences under Sections 417 , 420 , 306 , 506(ii) IPC r/w Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment to Women Act and under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 before the II Additional District Munsif - cum - Judicial Magistrate, Kumbakonam and he had after taking cognizance and after compliance of the procedure under Section 207 Cr.P.C, finding that the case was exclusively triable by the Special Court, committed it to the I Additional District and Sessions Judge (PCR), Thanjavur. The trial Court, after having satisfied that the appellant/accused was furnished with the copies of the documents, framed the charges against the appellant/accused for offences under Sections 417 , 420 , 506(ii) , IPC and under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment to Women Act and under Section 3(2)(v) the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 and U/S 306 IPC . When the appellant/accused had been asked to explain about the charges, he had denied the same and sought for trial and during the course of trial, the prosecution had examined witnesses P.W.1 to P.W.12 and marked Exs.P.1 to P.6 and M.Os.1 and 2. When the incriminating materials and circumstances were put to the appellant/accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C, he had denied the evidence let in by the prosecution, however, no oral or documentary evidence was adduced on the side of the defence. Thereafter, after hearing the both sides and perusing the oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court by Judgment dated 06.10.2017, acquitted the appellant/accused from the charges for offences U/S 420 IPC and 506(ii) IPC and found the appellant/accused guilty for offences U/S 417 IPC and U/S 306 IPC r/w Sec 3(2) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 and convicted the him as stated above. The Crux of the Prosecution Evidence:

(3.) P.W.1 is the father of the deceased Seethalakshmi. In his evidence before the Court, he had deposed that he belongs to Hindu Scheduled Caste Community and that he has got two daughters and a son and that the deceased is his second daughter and that after completion of +2, she was undergoing computer classes at Mayavaram and she had fallen love with the appellant/accused who was employed as Driver in a minibus and that the appellant/accused had also come to their house. Further, he coming to know of their relationship, had reprimanded his daughter saying that they should not move together since both belong to different communities. During April 2013, the deceased had gone to Kuttalam and not come back home and that she was found missing. He along with his relatives had gone to the house of the appellant/accused and he was also found missing and he learnt that the appellant/accused and his daughter had gone to Coimbatore. After ten days, his wife had informed that his daughter had come back home. On the next day, he had gone to his work and he heard that his daughter immolated herself in his relative's house by pouring kerosine on herself. Thereafter, they had taken his daughter to the Kumbakonam Government Hospital in an Ambulance and that the Judicial Magistrate had taken a statement and that on the same day, at 04.30 p.m, she passed away. He had further deposed that the deceased had given a statement to the police which was marked as Ex.P.1. The kerosine can was marked as M.O.1 and the match box was marked as M.O.2. In his cross examination, he had stated that despite he reprimanding his daughter, she was adamant that she would marry the appellant/accused.