SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 1 of 33 Fair
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE
AT KARIMNAGAR.
PRESENT: SRI.M.SATISH KUMAR,
RL. ASST. SESSIONS JUDGE,
KARIMNAGAR.
Tuesday, the 6th day of April, 2021
SESSIONS CASE NO.345 of 2019
(On committal made by the Learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of
First Class, Karimnagar vide PRC No.65 of 2019, dated 13.11.2019)
Name of the Complainant:The State represented by the SubInspector of Police, P.S., Karimnagar I Town in Cr.No.434 of 2019. Name of the Accused :Durgam Pavan Kumar, S/o Sri Ranga Rao, age: 39 years, Karna Brahmana, N/o Porandla village of Thimmapur Mandal, now at H.No.81 203, Kattarampur, Karimnagar. Charges:U/Secs.417, 420 and 306 IPC. Plea of the Accused:“ Not Guilty “ Finding of the Court: Not guilty
Sentence or Order : In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420 and 306 IPC, accordingly he is acquitted under Section 235(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused shall be in force for a period of six months as per Section 437A Cr.P.C.
Prosecution conducted by:Sri G. Raji Reddy, Addl.P.P.,
Accused defended bySri G.Madhusudhan Reddy, Advocate.
This case is coming before me on 01.04.2021 for final hearing in the presence of Sri G. Raji Reddy, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State/Complainant and of Sri G.Madhusudhan Reddy, Advocate for the Accused; upon perusing the material papers on record, having heard and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following: :: J U D G M E N T ::
1.This case is committed by the learned II Additional Judicial
Magistrate of First Class, Karimnagar to the Court of Sessions Division,
Karimnagar for the offences under Sections 417, 420 and 306 of IPC by its
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 2 of 33 Fair
order dated 13.11.2019 in P.R.C No.65/2019 and made over to this Court by the Court of Sessions Division, Karimnagar, for disposal in accordance with the law.
2.The SubInspector of Police P.S., Karimnagar I Town filed charge sheet against the accused in Cr.No.434 of 2019 for the offences under
Sections417, 420 and 306 IPC.
3. The averments of the prosecution in brief is that on 23.09.2019at 09:00 hours, the complainant/L.W.1 Chebrolu @ Boddoju Eshwaramma came to the Police Station and lodged a complaint stating that she had two daughters i.e., elder daughter Yamuna marriage was solemnized and she was staying in her inlaws house, younger daughter Vimala marriage was solemnized on 03.06.2017 with Shravan Kumar, due to illhealth of
Shravan Kumar, took the divorce to Vimala before the elders. Since then, she was staying with her by working in Medical Shop. In the year 2017, her daughter Vimala disappeared from the house and they searched for her daughter, but her location was not traced. After three days, her daughter Vimala came to their house. On enquiry, her daughter
Vimala disclosed that accused who is working as Medical Representative introducued to her through facebook and they fell in love and going to marry, for that she went to Karimnagar to meet the accused, For that the complainant admonished her daughter, due to that her daughter swallowed sleeping tablets. In the month of November, 2017, again her daughter Vimala went to Karimnagar stayed with the accused for week days and later came to their house. She came to Karimnagar along with her daughter and met with the accused at Kattarampur, Karimnagar in a rented house and he disclosed that he will marry her/Vimala and he loves
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 3 of 33 Fair
her. Later, after 15 days, she came to Karimnagar from Bhadrachalam to know her daughter's life, she disclosed that accused will marry her soon, as his mother heath condition is not good, after recovery, they will get married. When she inquired with the neighbours, she came to know that the accused had already a married person and got twice marriages, out of them, the first wife blessed with a son and gave divorce, 2nd wife blessed with a daughter and living separately, due to matrimonial disturbances.
On that she along with her daughter asked the accused, he stated that he is going to give divorce to his 2nd wife, after that he will marry Vimala.
After that her daughter Vimala used to visit the house and stayed with the accused for two or three days. When the accused visited their house, he said that he will marry her/Vimala. On 21.09.2019 at 10.00 a.m., and 2.00 p.m., she received phone call from her daughter that the accused was not behaving well and later she again informed to her that the accused was not ready to marry her, then she asked her to leave the house. On 22.09.2019 between 6.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m she made phone calls to her daughter, on the same day, she received phone call from the accused and informed her that her daughter committed suicide by hanging to ceiling fan. On that she along with her elder daughter, sonin law came to Kattarampur, Karimnagar on 22.09.2019 at 6.30 p.m., where her daughter found dead on bed and found black contusion around her neck. On inquiry with the neighbour Laxman, she came to know that on 22.09.2019, her daughter found hanging to ceiling fan, at about 11.00 hours, got down from hanging for surviving her, but she dead and slept on bed. Further, the complainant stating that due to cheating and constant harassment of the accused by making false promise to marry her and
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 4 of 33 Fair
abated the deceased to commit suicide, due to that her daughter died, due to long distance of their journey and coming to know the cause of death of her daughter, she could not report this matter in time. Thus, thereby the accused persons committed the offence.
Basing on the above complaint, L.W.13 N.Sridhar, SubInspector of Police registered a case in Cr.No.434 of 2019 under Sections 417, 420 and 306 IPC and took up investigation. During the course of investigation, he examined and recorded the statement of L.W.1
Chebrolu @ Boddoju Eshwaramma Later, he rushed to scene of offence, observed the scene by securing L.Ws.8 and 9/K.Srinu and D.Radha, incorporated the details in CDF and seized chunni which was used by deceased for hanging under CDF before the said panchas. Later, he filed requisition letter to L.W.12 K.Kankaiah, Executive Magistrate/Tahsilar,
Karimnagar Urban with a request to hold inquest over the dead body of the deceased. On reciept of requisition, L.W.12/Tahsildar visited the scene bearing H.No.81203, Kattarampur, Karimnagar and held inquest over the dead body of the deceased by securing L.Ws.8 to 10/K.Srinu,
D.Radha and Ch.Vijaya Kumari. Then, L.W.13 N.Sridhar, S.I of Police,
P.S., Karimnagar I Town examined and recorded the statements of L.Ws.2 to 6/G.Yamuna, G.Dileep Kumar, K.Sathamma, K.Laxman and G.Shekar and photographed the corpse with the help of L.W.6 G.Shekar and subjected the corpse under the escort to Government Civil Hospital,
Karimnagar for postmortem examination to knwo the actual cause of death of the deceased. On receipt of L.W.12/Tahsildar requisition, L.W.11 Dr.N.Laxmikanth Reddy, held autopsy over the dead body of the deceased.
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 5 of 33 Fair
While the efforts are in progress, on 24.09.2019 at 0900 hours,
L.W.13/SI of Police apprehended the accused at his house at Porandla, now at H.No.81203, Kattarampur, Karimnagar and on interrogation, he voluntarily confessed to have committed this offence and brought the accused to the police station, effected his arrest and sent him to the court for judicial remand. After completion of investigation, L.W.13/Sub
Inspector of Police filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420 and 306 IPC.
4.The learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Karimnagar took cognizance of the offences and after furnishing the copies of the documents to the accused relied upon by the prosecution under Section 207 Cr.P.C., the case was committed to the Court of
Sessions Division, Karimnagar by his/her order dated 13.11.2019 in
P.R.C No.65/2019 and the same was made over to this Court by the Court of Sessions Division, Karimnagar for trial and disposal.
5.On appearance of the accused and after hearing the learned
Additional Public Prosecutor and the counsel for the accused, this Court
has framed the charges under Sections 417, 420 and 306 IPC against accused, read over and explained to him in Telugu for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
6.During the trial, out of (13) witnesses cited by the prosecution agency in column No.13 of the charge sheet, the prosecution could examine PWs.1 to 10 as witnesses and got marked Exs.P1 to Ex.P6.
M.O.1 also got marked.
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 6 of 33 Fair
7.On closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Sec.313 Cr.P.C., wherein the accused again denied the evidence of prosecution witnesses and he reported no defense evidence.
8.Heard both sides and the counsel for accused filed written arguments.
9. Now the point for consideration is:
Whether the prosecution could prove the guilt of the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420 and 306 IPC, beyond reasonable doubt?
POINT:
10.In order to prove the case of the prosecution, prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 10.
10.P.W.1 is the defacto complainant and mother of the deceased.
P.W.1 deposed that the deceased – Vimala is her second daughter and she performed the deceased marriage with one Shravan Kumar on 03.06.2017. After three months of said marriage, her deceased daughter –
Vimala obtained divorce from her husband, due to illhealth of her husband. She further deposed that after divorce, the deceased – Vimala used to reside along with her at Bhadrachalam.
11.P.W.1 further deposed that two years prior to death of the deceased – Vimala, the deceased got acquaintance with the accused through facebook. The accused is resident of Karimnagar. P.W.1 further deposed that two years prior to death of the deceased, the deceased left her house and went along with the accused without informing to her, then she searched for her daughter – Vimala, later she came to know that the deceased went along with the accused. P.W.1 further deposed that after four days the deceased returned to her house, on her enquiry the
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 7 of 33 Fair
deceased daughter informed to her that she is interested to marry the accused but she/P.W.1 refused for the same. P.W.1 further deposed that then her deceased daughter returned her that if she did not agree for her marriage with the accused, she will commit suicide. Then, P.W.1 agreed for marriage of deceased daughter with the accused. P.W.1 further deposed that she along with her deceased daughter went to the house of the accused situated at Kattarampur, Karimnagar, in the month of
November, 2017. P.W.1 further deposed that on her enquiry the accused promised that he will marry her deceased daughter but stated that at that time his mother was suffering from illhealth, after recovery of her mother, he will marry the deceased. P.W.1 further deposed that on the request of the accused, she agreed to stay her daughter/deceased with the accused at his house and she alone went to her house. P.W.1 further deposed that after five or six months later her deceased daughter – Vimala came to know that the accused already married two marriages, then P.W.1 questioned the accused and his mother, at that time, the accused and his mother admitted about earlier two marriages of the accused and further stated that the accused obtained divorce from his first wife but he was not obtained divorce from his second wife and assured that after obtaining divorce from second wife, they will perform the marriage of the accused with her daughter – Vimala. P.W.1 further deposed that thereafter the accused failed to obtain divorce from the second wife and also failed to marry the deceased, but her deceased daughter – Vimala continued to live with the accused. P.W.1 further deposed that whenever her deceased daughter demanded the accused for marriage, the accused tortured her and stated to the deceased to go and die and advised to leave his house.
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 8 of 33 Fair
P.W.1 further deposed that the deceased used to inform to her about the harassment of the accused through phone, then she advised her deceased daughter to come to her house but the deceased refused to come to the house of P.W.1 and continued to stay with the accused.
12.P.W.1 further deposed that one day prior to death of her deceased daughter Vimala, she/deceased telephoned to P.W.1 at noon hours and stated that the accused told her to leave his house and refused to marry her and again on the same day at night at 1.00 a.m., her deceased daughter telephoned to her and stated about the harassment of the accused that the accused refused to marry her and stated to leave his house. P.W.1 further deposed that then she told to her deceased daughter, that she will come to the accused house in the morning, at about 6.00 a.m., she telephoned to her deceased daughter, but she not lifted, then she telephoned to the accused, the accused also not lifted the phone. P.W.1 further deposed that on repeated calling, the accused lifted the phone stated that he was not in the house and he was outside and he will call after reaching the house and after five minutes, the accused telephoned to her and informed that her daughter Vimala hanged at his house to a fan, they lifted her and she was alive and they shifting her to hospital. P.W.1 further deposed that then she and her daughter in law and her husband and L.W.3 – Dilip Kumar (her soninlaw) went to the
Government Hospital, Karimnagar about 6.00 p.m and found her daughter Vimala was died. P.W.1 further deposed that while they were on the middle of the way, the accused telephoned to them and informed that her daughter Vimala was died. P.W.1 further deposed that on 23rd morning she gave Ex.P.1 police report at I Town Police Station,
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 9 of 33 Fair
Karimnagar. P.W.1 further deposed that the accused cheated her daughter – Vimala with a promise to marry her and also used her physically and refused to marry, due to her, her daughter Vimala committed suicide by hanging.
13.P.W.2 is the sister of the deceased. P.W.2 deposed that on 03.06.2017, the marriage of her deceased sister – Vimala held with one
Shravan Kumar and three months after the said marriage, due to health of said Shravan Kumar, her deceased sister – Vimala obtained divorce
before the elders. P.W.2 further deposed that thereafter her sister –
Vimala used to work in Medical Shop at Bhadrachalam and the accused got acquaintance with the deceased – Vimala through facebook. P.W.2 further deposed that in the month of November, 2017, her deceased sister – Vimala went with the accused after enquiry, they came to know that her sister went to with the accused and residing with him at Karimnagar.
Pw.2 further deposed that after one week, they came to know the telephone number of the accused, when they asked the accused to send her sister – Vimala and they will discuss about the marriage later. P.W.2 further deposed that after one week, her sister Vimala came to
Bhadrachalam and after two days her sister – Vimala stated to P.W.2 that she is in love with the accused and stated that she will stay with the accused only and she will marry the accused and also stated don’t search for marriage alliances to her. P.W.2 further deposed that after two days, she sent her decreased sister to the house of her mother/P.W.1, after two days, the deceased – Vimala consuming sleeping tables as they not sending to the house of the accused and after treatment, her sister –
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 10 of 33 Fair
Vimala went to Karimnagar and joined with the accused and used to live with the accused at his house at Karimnagar.
14.P.W.2 further deposed that after 15 days, her mother/P.W.1 came to Karimnagar and talked with the mother of the accused and stated it is not correct to live together with her sister – Vimala without marriage and her mother – P.W.1 met one Srinivas Rao and the said elders is mother of accused assured that at that time there is no auspicious days for marriage and coming auspicious days, then they will perform the marriage, then her mother returned to Bhadrachalam and the accused and her sister – Vimala used to reside together in the house of the accused and they also used to visit Bhadrachalam to the house of her mother P.W.1. P.W.2 further deposed that the mother of the accused informed to her mother/P.W.1 that already two marriages held to the accused and he obtained divorce from his first wife and also children with his first wife and the accused also married second time and the second wife also have children but the accused did not obtain divorce from his second wife and due to said reason, the accused is not marrying her sister Vimala. P.W.2 further deposed that the mother of the accused and assured to P.W.1 that they are treating her sister – Vimala as wife of the accused and they convinced P.W.1 to continue her sister – Vimala to live along with the accused at the house of the accused and thereafter the accused and deceased lived happily for a period of two or three months.
P.W.2 further deposed that thereafter the accused used to neglect the deceased and used to harass the deceased to leave his house and he will not marry the deceased. But her deceased sister refused to go to
Bhadrachalam. P.W.2 further deposed that she came to know through
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 11 of 33 Fair
her mother/P.W.1 that prior to one day the death of the deceased, the deceased telephoned to P.W.1 and informed but the accused harassing her and refused to marry her and also stated to leave his house, but she refused to leave the house of the accused and then her mother/P.w.1 informed to the deceased that she will come on the next day to
Karimnagar. P.w.2 further deposed that she came to know through P.W.1 that the accused used to state to the deceased if she not leave his house and go to Bhadrachalam, otherwise, she may go on die, on that night also the deceased telephoned to P.W.1 and informed the same. P.W.2 further deposed that about 6.00 a.m. her mother/P.W.1 telephoned to the deceased but she not lifted, then, she telephoned to the accused, the accused also not lifted the phone, then, P.W.1 telephone to the deceased sister, then P.W.2 telephoned to the deceased and also to the accused, but they not lifted. P.W.2 further deposed that then they prepared to go to
Karimnagar, the accused telephoned to her and informed about 11.30 a.m. on 22.09.2019 that her sister – Vimala attempted to commit suicide by hanging and they are shifting her to the hospital and within five minutes, the accused again telephoned and informed that her sister died due to hanging . P.W.2 further deposed that while they were on the way, the police telephoned, but they are shifting the dead body to the
Government Hospital, Karimnagar, then, they reached to the I Town Police
Station, Karimnagar at about 9.30 p.m and the police brought them to the
Government Hospital where they found the dead body of the deceased –
Vimala, on seeing the dead body, her mother/P.W.1 was unconscious and as such they are unable to give police report and on the next day on 23.09.2019, P.w.1 gave police report. P.W.2 further deposed that as the
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 12 of 33 Fair
accused cheated her deceased sister – Vimala and used physically on the promise of marriage and refused to marry and the accused harassed her as such her sister – Vimala committed suicide.
15.P.W.3 who is said to be house owner of the accused and P.W.6 who is son of P.W.3. P.Ws.3 and 6 deposed that they have own house at
Kattarampur, Karimnagar, the accused took rent of their house and resided as tenant in their house for a period of two years prior to this case and during said period, the accused used to reside with the deceased –
Vimala. P.w.6 further deposed that the does not know about disputes between the accused and deceased and further deposed that on 22.09.2019, the deceased Vimala committed suicide by hanging in the said rented house.
16.P.W.4 is the neighbour of the accused. P.W.4 deposed that previously he run hotel in front of the house of the accused at
Kattarampur, Karimnagar and he knows the accused and the deceased –
Vimala used to reside with the accused. P.W.4 further deposed that about one and half year back, when he was at his hotel, the accused called him to his house, then he went to his house and found – Vimala hanged to a fan with chunni in the house of the accused, then he and accused removed the body and kept the body on the ground, then, he left the house.
17.P.W.5 is the photographer. P.W.5 deposed that on 22.09.2019 on the request of I Town Police, he went to the deceased house at
Kattarampur, took the photographs of the dead body of the deceased and later he handed over photos along with CD. Ex.,P.2 is six photographs along with CD.
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 13 of 33 Fair
18.P.W.7 is one of the panch witnesses for crime details form and inquest. P.W.7 deposed that he is neighbour of P.W.2 at Bhadrachalam, after knowing the death of the deceased, he along with P.w.2 and other relatives came to Karimnagar and went to the deceased house on 22nd date year 2019 and found the deceased – Vimala died by committing suicide by hanging and the police visited the scene of offence on 23rd date year 2019 (he does not remember the month) and seized chunni i.e.,
M.O.1, which was used by the deceased for committing suicide and police conducted scene of offence and drafted rough sketch. P.W.7 further deposed that later he went to the Government Hospital, Karimnagar where the dead body of the deceased kept, there MRO conducted inquest panchanama over the dead body of the deceased between 11.30 am to 1.30 p.m on same day. Ex.P.3 – CDF and Ex.P.4 – Inquest panchanama.
19.P.W.8 – Executive Magistrate/Tahsildar of Veenavanka Mandal deposed that on 23.09.2019, he received requisition from I Town Police,
Karimangar to conduct inquest over the dead body of the deceased, then he visited the scene of offence situated at Kattarampur, Karimnagar and found the dead body of the deceased, then, he directed the police to shift the dead body to Government Hospital, Karimnagar, accordingly, the police shifted the dead body of the deceased to the Government Hospital,
Karimnagar and he conducted the inquest panchanama in between 10.00 to 12.00 noon in the presence of witnesses and relatives and on enquiry he came to know that the deceased died due to commit suicide by hanging.
20.P.W.9 is the Medical Officer who conducted inquest panchanama over the dead body of the deceased – Vimala. He deposed
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 14 of 33 Fair
that on 23.09.2019 on requisition of P.W.8, he conducted postmortem examination of the deceased – Boddoju @ Ch.Vimala at Government
Hospital, Karimnagar in between 16:05 to 1710 hours on the same day.
He further deposed that on examination, he found an antimortem pressure abrasion i.e., ligature mark present over the neck brown coloured located above thyroid cartilage, obliquely placed running upwards, backwards, 33 cm in length with a varying width of 1 to 3 cms, irregular in nature with 3 circular abrasions over right side of neck, right side of mandibular region indicating knot area. Ligature mark is situated at 12 cms from left mastoid process, 7 cms from chin, 8 cms from right mastoid process. Skin of ligature mark is ecchymosed, parchmentised with intact thyroid cartilage and hyoid bone and caused of death is due to hanging and accordingly, he issued Ex.P.5 postmortem examination report.
21.P.W.10 Investigation Officer. He deposed that on 23.09.2019 at 09.00 a.m. received Ex.P.1 report from P.W.1, basing on it, he registered a case and issued FIR and examined P.W.1, visited scene of offence and conducted scene of offence panchanama in the presence of mediators and seized chunni – M.O.1 and also examined the witnesses and got photographed of the dead body of the deceased and on his requisition, P.W.8 conducted inquest panchanama and also shifted the dead body to the Government Ho0spital, where P.w.9 conducted postmortem examination and on 24.09.20109 he apprehended the accused, effected his arrest and sent him to the court for judicial remand and after completion of investigation, he filed charge sheet.
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 15 of 33 Fair
22.The case of the prosecution is that the deceased – Vimala, native of Bhadrachalam and she got married with one Shravan Kumar and obtained divorce, within three months of her marriage, due to illhealth of her marriage and she is working at Medical Shop. The accused working as Medical Representative, he already got two marriages and obtained divorce from his first wife, he has also a son with his first wife and later he got second marriage, and he also has daughter with second wife, due to disputes, the accused is living separately with the second wife. The accused got acquaintance with the deceased through facebook and made false promise to marry the deceased – Vimala on believing the deceitful words of the accused, the deceased came to Karimnagar about two years back prior to her death and started living wit the accused at Karimnagar, thereafter, the accused postponed the marriage and refused to marry the deceased – Vimala and on 21.09.2019, the deceased asked the accused about the marriage, and the accused warned the deceased to leave his house and refused to marry her and also stated go and die, thereby the deceased committed suicide by hanging on 22.09.2019 as accused cheated and abated to commit suicide thereby the accused charged for the offences under Sections 417, 420 and 306 IPC.
23.As per Ex.P.1 – Police Report and evidence of P.W.1 – Mother of the deceased – Vimala and evidence of P.W.2 – sister of the deceased –
Vimala. The deceased marriage held on 03.06.2017 with one Shravan
Kumar and after three months of the said marriage, the deceased – Vimala obtained divorce from her husband in the presence of elders. In the cross examination, P.W.1 deposed that might be the husband of the deceased –
Vimala alive as on today. The prosecution not placed any evidence that
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 16 of 33 Fair
the divorce of deceased valid in law. P.Ws.1 and 2 also not stated in their evidence there is a custom in their community to obtain divorce in the presence of the elders. Therefore, the prosecution failed to prove that the deceased – Vimala obtained valid divorce from her husband, in the eye of law. Only if she obtained divorce lawfully from her husband, then only she is entitled to marry another person legally.
24.As per the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2, after obtaining divorce from the husband, the deceased – Vimala used to live with her mother at the house of P.w.1 at Bhadrachalam, the deceased used to work in Medical
Shop at Bhadrachalam. P.Ws.1 and 2 further deposed that the accused acquaintance with the deceased – Vimala through facebook and on one day prior to two years of death of deceased on one day the deceased –
Vimala left the house of P.w.1 and went along with the accused without informing to P.W.1, then they searched for the deceased and later they came to know that the deceased went with the accused and returned house of P.w.1 after four days, then on enquiry by P.w.1, the deceased informed that she interested to marry with the accused, but P.W.1 refused for the same on that the deceased threatened to commit suicide if she not agreed for the marriage, then P.w.1 agreed for the marriage, then she along with the deceased went to the house of the accused situated at
Karimnagar in the month of November, 2017 and on enquiry by P.W.1, the accused promised to marry the deceased – Vimala and stated that at that time his mother was suffering from illheath and after recovery of his mother, he will marry the deceased and further deposed that on the request of the accused, she agreed to stay the deceased with the accused at accused house and then P.W.1 returned to Bhadrachalam. P.w.1
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 17 of 33 Fair
further deposed that after five or \six months later, the deceased came to know that two marriages were already held to the accused, then, P.W.1 questioned the accused and his mother at the house of the accused on that his mother told and admitted about earlier two marriages of the accused and further stated that the accused obtained divorce from his first wife and he not obtained divorce from the second wife and assured after obtaining divorce from second wife, then he will perform the marriage with the deceased. Whereas, P.W.2 deposed that the mother of the accused informed to P.W.1 about the two marriages held to the accused and also about obtaining divorce by the accused from his first wife and have children with the first wife and but he did not obtain divorce from second wife and also have children with the second wife and due to the said reason, the accused not married the deceased. Thereafter, for a period of 2 or 3 months deceased and accused lived together happily.
25.This part of evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 shows that the deceased got acquaintance with the accused through facebook and P.Ws.1 and 2 not stated that the accused came to Bhadrachalam and induced the deceased in the name of love and took her to Karimnagar. P.Ws.1 and 2 categorically deposed that the deceased herself went with the accused to
Karimnagar and stayed at that time for a period of four days, then, returned to Bhadrachalam and informed to P.W.1 that she intends to marry the accused, but P.W.1 refused for the same and as per the evidence of P.W.2, when P.W.1 refused to perform the marriage, the deceased consumed sleeping tablets, as P.Ws.1 and 2 not sending her to the house of the accused and after treatment, the deceased went to
Karimnagar and joined with the accused and deceased used to live with
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 18 of 33 Fair
the accused at the house of the accused at Karimnagar. This part of evidence shows that the deceased herself even without marriage with the accused, she left her house and started living with the accused and when
P.W.1 refused to perform her marriage with the accused, the deceased consumed sleeping tablets also, due to said reason, P.Ws.1 and 2 allowed the deceased to live with the accused. In Indian society generally no woman live with a man without marriage, as husband and wife in one roof.
26.If really the accused concealed of his two marriages to the deceased and concealed that he obtained divorce from his second wife thereby the accused cheated the deceased at least the deceased after knowing the fact that the accused already married two times and having children with two wives and obtained divorce from his first wife and not obtained divorce from second wife, at that time the deceased ought to have lodged police report against the accused for cheating her in the name of love, but admittedly the deceased – Vimala not lodged any police report.
Even P.Ws.1 and 2 also not gave any police report against the accused when they know about the above said fact. More over, even after knowing the said fact, P.Ws.1 and 2 allowed the deceased to live with the accused.
More over P.W.2 categorically deposed that even after knowing the said fact, the accused and deceased lived happily for a period of two months.
According to P.Ws.1 and 2, thereafter the accused used to neglect the deceased and whenever deceased asked the accused for marriage, the accused tortured the deceased to leave his house and go and die.
According to P.W.1, on one day prior to death of the deceased, the deceased – Vimala telephoned to P.W.1 and stated to P.W.1 that the
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 19 of 33 Fair
accused told her to leave his house and refused to marry her at noon hours and also at mid night at 1.00 a.m.,, the deceased telephoned to
P.W.1, again stated to P.W.1 that the accused refused to marry her and stated to leave his house, on that P.w.1 stated to the deceased, she will come in the morning, at morning at 6.00 a.m., P.w.1 telephoned to the deceased and also to the accused, but they not lifted, later, the accused telephoned to P.W.1 and informed that the deceased hanged in his house to a fan and she was alive and shifting her to the hospital, then P.Ws.1 and 2 and the relatives went to the Government Hospital, Karimnagar at about 6.00 pm where they found the deceased was died. Even on middle of the way, while they were coming to Karimnagar, the accused telephoned to them and infirmed them that the deceased was died.
27.Admittedly, as on the date of death of the deceased, the accused marriage is subsisting with his second wife, as such he would not marry the deceased legally. More over, the deceased also not obtained divorce legally from her husband – Shravan Kumar. Therefore, if the accused marries the deceased, he will be liable for punishment under Section 494
IPC. Therefore, there is a justification for the accused not to marry the deceased as on the date of death of the deceased. More over, as the deceased not obtained divorce from her husband legally, as such if she marries the accused, she will be liable for punishment under Section 494
IPC. According to the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2, the deceased telephoned to P.W.1 on one day prior to her death and informed that the accused neglecting her and advised to leave his house. Admittedly, in between the deceased and accused, there is no legal relationship as such the deceased has no right to demand the accused to stay with him in his house, at the
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 20 of 33 Fair
same time, the accused also no obligation to allow the deceased to stay with him, without marriage.
28.More over, P.Ws.3 and 6 also categorically deposed that the accused and deceased used to live together as tenants in their house.
More over, P.Ws.3 and 6 not stated that at that time the accused harassed the deceased – Vimala.
Section 415 IPC read as under:
Cheating Whoever by deceiving any person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived to deliver any property, to any person or to consent that any person shall retain any property or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property, is said to “cheat.”
Section 417 IPC, read as under:
Punishment for cheating – whoever, cheats shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.
Hon’ble Calcutta High Court (Division Bench) between Abhai
Pradhan vs State of West Bengal, 1999 (CRLA 3534), it was held that the mere promise to marry and later on withdrawing the said promise will not an amount to an offence or cheating as defined in Section 415 IPC.
More over the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India judgment in
Criminal Appeal No.233 of 2021 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.11218 of 2019) dated 01.03.2021.
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 21 of 33 Fair
between Sonu @ Subhash Kumar – Appellate vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another: Wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court, discussing Section 376 IPC in relevant portion of para No.3 , the statement of the second respondent was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The entirety of the statement is extracted below:
I have love affair with Sonu, S/o Kamlesh, age: 27 years, for the last 1 ½ years. He used to tell to marry with me. I got influenced by his talks. I Voluntarily developed relationship of husbandwife with him. Now, he and his family members are refusing to marry with me. On 5th January, 2018 Sonu went to Jhansi and from there also he kept on taking (sic talking) with me on phone. He called me to Jhansi and then on 21.01.2018 without informing anybody in my home, I went to Jhansi on the address given by Sonu. His father met me there and told me that they are not intending to solemnize my marriage with Sonu and advised me to ran away from there after taking some money. Sonu’s mother Shobha and sister Neha assaulted me. On 21.01.2018, I stated at Jhansi station and then on the training (sic train) of 12 O’ clock in the night I came back to Mathura. My sole grievance is that Sonu is refusing to marry with me. I have studied up to class 6th I have nothing more to say. Sd/ (Victim).
In 7th to 11th paras of judgment as under:
7.On the basis of the rival submissions and with the assistance of the counsel, we have perused the FIR. The FIR specifically records that the second respondent had developed a friendship with the appellant and that he had assured that he would marry her. The FIR then records that the appellant and the second respondent developed a physical relationship which spread over a period of one and a half years, during the course of which the second respondent conversed with the parents and sister of the appellant. It has been alleged in the FIR that the parents of the appellant were agreeable to the couple getting married. As a matter of
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 22 of 33 Fair
fact, the appellant returned to his home town at Jhansi on 5th January, 2018 when he had made a phone call to her stating that she should come and visit him so that they can get married. On travelling to Jhansi at the behest of the appellant, the second respondent was informed by the father of the appellant that the appellant did not wish to marry her. The contents of the statement under Section164 of Cr.P.C also indicate that the second respondent had “voluntarily developed relationship of husbandwife with him.” The second respondent has then stated that “now, he and his family members are refusing to marry with.” The second respondent has further stated that “may sole grievance is that Sonu is refusing to marry with me.”
8.The contents of the FIR as well as the statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C leave no manner to doubt that, on the basis of the allegations as they stand, three important features emerge:
(I)The relationship between the appellant and the second respondent was of a consensual nature;
(ii)The parties were in the relationship for about a period of one and a half years; and
(iii)Subsequently, the appellant had expressed a disinclination to marry the second respondent which led to the registration of the FIR.
9.In Pramod Suryabhan Pawar (supra), while dealing with a similar situation, the principles of law which must govern a situation like the present were enunciated in the following observations:
“ Where the promise to marry is false and the intention of the maker at the time of making the promise itself was not to abide by it but to deceive the woman to convince
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 23 of 33 Fair
her to engage in sexual relations, there is a “misconception of fact” that vitiates the woman’s content.” On the other hand, a breach of a promise cannot be said to be a false promise. To establish a false promise, the maker of the promise should have had no intention of upholding his word at the time of giving it...”
10.Further, the court has observed:
“To summarise the legal position that emerges from the above cases, the “consent” of a woman with respect to Section 374 must involve an active and reasoned deliberation towards the proposed act. To establish whether the “consent” was vitiated by a “misconception of fact” arising out of a promise to marry, two propositions must be established. The promise of marriage must have been a false promise, given in bad faith and with no intention of being adhered to at the time kit was given. The false promise itself must be of immediate relevance, or bear a direct nexus to the woman’s decision to engage in the sexual act.”
11.Bearing in mind the tests which have been enunciated in the above decision, we are of the view that even assuming that lla the allegations in the FIR are correct for the purposes of considering the application for quashing under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C., no offence has been established. There is no allegation to the effect that the promise to marry given to the second respondent was false at the inception. On the contrary, it would appear from the contents of the FIR that there was a subsequent refusal on the part of the appellant to marry the second respondent which gave rise to the registration of the FIR. On these facts, we are of the view that the High Court was in error in declining to entertain the petition under Section 428 of Cr.P.C on the basis that it was only the evidence at trial which would lead to a determination as to whether an offence was established.
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 24 of 33 Fair
The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India (CAJ)
judgment in Criminal Appeal No.1165 of 2019 (@SLP (Crl.)
No.2712 of 2019 between Pramod Suryabhan Pawar –
Appellant vs. The State of Maharashtra and another –
Respondents, wherein also the Hon’ble Supreme Court while disillusioning Section 375 IPC in the relevant para Nos.19 and 20 held as under:
19.The allegations in the FIR indicate that in November, 2009 the complainant initially refused to engage in sexual relations with the accused, but on the promise of marriage, he established sexual relations. However, the FIR includes a reference to several other allegations that are relevant for the present purpose. The are as follows:
(i)The complainant and the appellant knew each other since 1998 and were intimate since 2004;
(ii)The complainant and the appellant met regularly, traveled great distances to meet each other, resided in each others houses on multiple occasions, engaged in sexual intercourse regularly over a course of five years and on multiple occasions visited the hospital jointly to check whether the complainant was pregnant; and
(iii)The appellant expressed his reservations about marrying the complainant on 31st January, 2014. This led to arguments between them. Despite this, the appellant and the complainant continued to engage in sexual intercourse until March, 2015.
The appellant is a Deputy Commandant in the CRPF while the complainant is an Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax.
20.The allegations in the FIR do not on their face indicate that the promise by the appellant was false, or that the
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 25 of 33 Fair
complainant engaged in sexual relations on the basis of this promise. There is no allegation in the FIR that when the appellant promised to marry the complainant, it was done in bad faith or with the intention to deceive her. The appellants failure in 2016 to fulfill his promise made in 2008 cannot be construed to mean the promise itself was false. The allegations in the FIR indicate that the complainant was aware that there existed obstacles to marrying the appellant since 2008, and that she and the appellant continued to engage in sexual relations long after their getting married had become a disputed matter.
Even thereafter, the complainant travelled to visit and reside with the appellant at his postings and allowed him to spend his weekends at her residence. The allegations in the FIR belie the case that she was deceived by the appellants promise of marriage. Therefore, even if the facts set out in the complainants statements are accepted in totality, no offence under Section 375 of the IPC has occurred.
29.Whereas in Ex.P.1 report, P.W.1 mentioned that when she enquired with the neighbours, when she came to know that already two marriages held to the accused and obtained divorce from his first wife after birth of the son and the accused is having disputes with the second wife, due to said disputes, he is living separately with the second wife and also the accused has one daughter with the second wife. Whereas, P.W.1 deposed in her evidence deposed that she came to know that two marriages already held to accused through deceased. Whereas, P.W.2
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 26 of 33 Fair
deposed that the mother of accused informed to P.W.1 that two marriages held to the accused. But this court is not believing the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 that the deceased not aware about two marriages held to the accused, because by that time, the deceased already residing with the accused since long time.
More over, even after knowing that the accused not obtained divorce from his second wife, the deceased continued to live with the accused, without marriage at the accused house at
Karimnagar. More over, at that time the deceased also aware that there is hurdle to her marriage as the accused not obtained divorce from the second wife. More over, the deceased divorce from her husband also not legal. Only she obtained divorce
before the elders. Hence, Section 417 IPC not attracted that the
accused dishonestly concealed factum of second marriage. More over, to attract the cheating, the prosecution must be proved that the accused at the time of making his promise, the intention of the accused not abide by his promise. More over, as per Section 415 IPC, the accused has to induce the person to do or omit to do anything which he would not to do or omit if he were not so deceived and which act or omission causes are likely called damage or harm to that person, body, mind, reputation or property is said to “cheat.” But, in this case, even the deceased knowing that the accused not obtained divorce from his second wife, she continued to live with the accused in his house.
Therefore, she knowingly that the accused will not marry her till he obtained divorce from his second wife and continued to live
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 27 of 33 Fair
with him in his house. Therefore, it shows that the accused not deceived the deceased to do or omit to do anything which the deceased would not to do or omit. If she was not so deceived.
Hence, Section 415 IPC ingredients are not attracted. Therefore, the present facts of the case, Section 417 IPC is not attracted.
Hence, the prosecution failed to prove Section 417 IPC.
Section 420 IPC, read as under:
Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property – Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
To attract Section 420 IPC, there must be dishonest intention to induce deliver of the property. In this case, there is no delivery of property. Hence, Section 420 IPC is not attracted.
In this case, admittedly, as per the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 and also evidence of P.W.9/Medical Officer and Investigation Officer/P.W.10, the deceased died due to hanging in the house of the accused. Therefore, there is no dispute that the deceased was died due to suicide.
The accused is charged for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read as under:
Section 306 IPC: If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extent to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 28 of 33 Fair
Section 107 IPC reads as under:
Abetment of a thing – A person abets the doing of a thing, who –
Firstly: Instigates any person to do that thing; or
Secondly: Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or
Thirdly: Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.
Explanation 1 – A person who, by willful misrepresentation, or by willful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to said instigate the doing of that thing.
Explanation 2 – Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitate the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in Crl.Appeal No.2181 of 2009 between State of West Bengal ...Appellate vs. Indrajit Kundu and others, judgment dated: 18.10.2019, wherein the relevant para in para
Nos.11, 12 and 13 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under:
In the case of Swamy Prhaladdas vs. State of M.P. and another, reported in 1995 Supplementary (3) SCC 438:
11.This court while considering utterances like “to go and die” during the quarrel between husband and wife, uttered by husband held that utterances of such words are not direct cause for committing suicide.
In such circumstances, in the aforesaid judgment this court held that
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 29 of 33 Fair
Sessions Judge erred in summoning the appellant to face the trial and
quashed the proceedings.
12.In the judgment in the case of Ramesh Kumar vs. Statement of
Chattisgarh this court has considered the scope of Section 306 IPC and the ingredients which are essential for abetment as set out in Section 107
IPC. While interpreting the word “instigation,” it is held in paragraph 20 as under:
20. Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke incite or encourage to do “an act.” To satisfy the requirement of instigation though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes instigation must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. The present one is not a case where the accused had by his acts or omission or by a continued course of conduct created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide in which case an instigation may have been inferred. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequence to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation.
13.Similarly in the judgment in the case of Sanju Alias Sanjay
Singh Sengar vs. State of M.P held in (2202) 5 SCC 371. When any quarrel which has taken place between husband and wife in which husband has stated to have told the deceased “to go and die,” this court has held that the suicide committed two days thereafter was not proximate to the quarrel though the deceased was named in the suicide note and that the suicide was not the direct result of quarrel when the
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 30 of 33 Fair
appellant used abusive language and told the deceased to go and die.
Judgments referred above support the case of respondents, except stating that on 05.03.2004 when the deceased went to the premises of first respondent, his parents who are respondents Nos.2 and 3 addressed her as a callgirl. At the same time by applying the judgments referred above we are of the view that such material is not sufficient to proceed with the trial by framing charge of offence under Section 306/34 IPC. It is also from the material that there was no goading or solicitation or insinuation by any of the respondents to the victim to commit suicide.
30.In this case, P.W.1 deposed that prior to one day of death of the deceased, the deceased telephoned at noon hours on 21.09.2019 and also again on 22.09.2019 at 1.00 a.m the deceased telephoned to her and stated that the accused refused to marry her and also stated to leave his house and P.W.1 furtherer deposed that the accused used to harass the deceased go and die and leave his house. Therefore, as per the above said judgments, mere uttering go and die that by itself is not sufficient to constitute an offence under Section 306 IPC.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chitresh Kumar Chopra v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) reported in (2009) 16 SCC 605 while dealing with the term "instigation" held as under: "Para.16. ... instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do 'an act'. To satisfy the requirement of 'instigation', though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes 'instigation' must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out.
Where the accused had, by his acts or omission or by a continued
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 31 of 33 Fair
course of conduct, created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide, in which case, an 'instigation' may have to be inferred. A word uttered in a fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow, cannot be said to be instigation.
Para no.17: Thus, to constitute 'instigation', a person who instigates another has to provoke, incite, urge or encourage the doing of an act by the other by 'goading' or 'urging forward'. The dictionary meaning of the word 'goad' is 'a thing that stimulates someone into action; provoke to action or reaction' ... to keep irritating or annoying somebody until he reacts.…"
31.To attract Section 306 IPC, the accused had, by his acts or omission or by a continued course of conduct, created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide, but in this case, the prosecution failed to prove that the accused created a situation to the deceased, no other option except to commit suicide. More over, as per the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2, on 22.09.2019 they came to Karimnagar and directly went to Government
Hospital at about 6.00 p.m., there they found the dead body of the deceased – Vimala but as per Ex.P.3 – CDF, at the time of conducting
CDF, the dead body was present at the scene of offence. More over, as per inquest panchanama – Ex.P.4, it was conducted by P.W.8 in the presence of P.W.7, at the house of the accused on 23.09.2019 and whereas P.W.7 one of the panch witnesses for inquest deposed that inquest panchanama was conducted at Government Hospital, Karimnagar, whereas
P.w.8/Tahsildar who conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased that he visited the scene of offence at Kattarampur, Karimnagar on 23.09.2019 and he directed the police to shift the dead body to the
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 32 of 33 Fair
government hospital, Karimnagar and he conducted inquest panchanama in between 10.00 am to 12.00 noon. Therefore, there is a doubt where the inquest panchanama was conducted and at the time of CDF, the dead body was present at the scene of offence as P.Ws.1 and 2 deposed that on 22.09.2019 at 6.00 p.m they went to the government hospital, where they saw the dead body of the deceased.
32.As per the above discussion, this court finds that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420 and 306 IPC, accordingly, the accused is entitled to acquittal. Accordingly the point is answered.
33.In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420 and 306 IPC, accordingly he is acquitted under Section 235(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of the accused shall be in force for a period of six months as per Section 437A Cr.P.C.
The material object i.e., M.O.1 chunni shall be destroyed after appeal period is over.
Typed to my dictation, corrected and pronounced by me in an open Court on this the 6th day of April, 2021.
PRL.ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,
KARIMNAGAR.
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
FOR PROSECUTION: FOR DEFENCE: PW1. Chebrolu @ Boddoju Eshwaramma None PW2 Garugu Yamuna, PW3 Kura Sathamma, PW4 Koli Laxman, PW5 Gaddam Shekar, PW6 Kura Srinivas Prasad, PW7 Kolipaka Srinu, PW8K.Kanakaiah, Tahsildar,
SC 345 of 2019 Page No. 33 of 33 Fair
PW9Dr.N.Laxmikanth Reddy, PW10N.Sridhar, SI of Police.
::EXHIBITS MARKED::
FOR PROSECUTION: Ex.P1Report of P.W.1 to Police. Ex.P2Six photographs along with CD. Ex.P3Crime Details Form. Ex.P4Inquest panchanama. Ex.P5Postmortem Examination Report. Ex.P6First Information Report.
FOR DEFENCE: Nil
MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED
M.O.1: Chunni.
PRL. ASST. SESSIONS JUDGE,
KARIMNAGAR.