STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. SHIVARAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is by the State assailing the judgment of acquittal of the accused for the offence under Sections 498-A and 306 of ipc in Sessions Case No. 57 of 1990 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bidar, dated 30-3-1998.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in brief are as follows:the marriage of deceased-Shakti Devi took place somewhere in the year 1978. Out of their wedlock two daughters and a son were born. The deceased was a b. A. , B. Ed. , double graduate with typewriting qualification and for sometime she was working as High school Teacher in Kalur Lingeshwar school and left the job. Whereas, the accused was running a radio repair shop at the time of the incident at Humnabad. It is alleged by the prosecution that the accused-Shivaraj was addicted to alcohol and that he used to come home fully drunk, assaulting his wife and also subjecting her to cruelly. That on 13-2-1988 at about 7. 00 p. m. the accused having fully drunk started quarreling. Shakti devi having fed-up herself poured kerosene on her body and lit fire. On seeing the incident, the neighbours rushed, put off the fire and she was shifted to General Hospital at Humnabad. P. W. 6-Dr. Karpur Mallappa treated her and advised to shift her to major hospital. He sent M. L. C report to the police. On receiving the M. L. C. report, P. W. 7 b. S. Malagathi, P. S. I. , visited the hospital, recorded the statement of the victim as per Ex. P- 4 in the presence of the doctor, returned to the police station and registered a case in Cr. No. 60 of 1988 for the offence under Sections 306 and 498-A of IPC. Later the victim was shifted to general Hospital, Solapur. It is further alleged that the statement of the victim was recorded by the Special Judicial magistrate, Solapur, as per Ex. P-6 on 14-3-1988 between 5. 40 to 6. 40 p. m. The victim-Shakti Devi breath her last on 14-3-1988 at about 5. 00p. m. or so. P. W. 9 dr. Subashchandra of Solapur General hospital conducted autopsy on 15-3-1988 between 6. 05 to 6. 40 p. m. , as per Ex. P-8 and opined that the death was due to shock on account of 83% burns. P. W. 7 b. S. Malagathi, P. S. I. Humnabad, prepared mahazar as per Ex. P-5, seized the material objects, recorded the statement of the witnesses and handed over the further investigation to C. O. D. Police Inspector i. e. , P. W. 8-G. R. Patil. On 11-8-1988, P. W. 8-G. R. Patil took over further investigation, recorded the statement of the witnesses, collected the post-mortem report as per Ex. P-8 and wound certificate of the deceased as per ex. P-2. After completion of the investigation, filed the charge-sheet for the offence under Sections 306 and 498-A of IPC. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bidar, secured thepresence of the accused. Charges were framed for the offence under sections 498-A and 306 of IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in all examined P. Ws. 1 to 9, marked Exs. P-1 to P-8 and produced M. Os. 1 to 4. The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of Cr. P. C. The defence is one of total denial. The learned additional Sessions Judge, for the reasons recorded in its Judgment acquitted the accused for the offence under Sections 498-A and 306 of IPC. It is this Judgment of acquittal, which is questioned by the State in the present appeal.

(3.) The learned High Court Government pleader Sri Reddy contended that the reasoning of the learned Additional Sessions judge in not appreciating the testimony of p. Ws. 1 to 3 is erroneous and the finding recorded is perverse. Secondly, contended that when the victim-Shakti Devi was taken to the hospital, P. W. 6-Dr. Karpur Mallappa, medical Officer, General Hospital, humnabad, treated her and sent M. L. C report to the Humnabad Police. P. W. 7 b. S. Malgathi, P. S. I. , came to the hospital, recorded the statement of the victim at the relevant point of time, which shows that as she could not able to bear the harassment and torture meted out by the accused, on account of it on her own poured kerosene and lit fire. When the injured herself stated about the harassment at the relevant point of time that no corroboration is required to prove the harassment and subjected her to cruelty. It is also clear that on account of 83% of burns, she died at Solapur Government hospital while she was undergoing treatment. Sri Reddy, further submitted that the learned Additional Sessions Judge disbelieved the evidence of the parents and sister only on the ground that there is no corroboration and that their evidence is inconsistent which is erroneous and not sustainable and that the Court has not appreciated the testimony of the prosecution witnesses properly. Therefore, prayed to set aside the Judgment of acquittal and to convict the accused for the offence charged.