1FAIR
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE
KARIMNAGAR.
PRESENT:- DR. S. SRINIVAS REDDY, I-Addl. Sessions Judge, FAC : Prl. Sessions Judge,
KARIMNAGAR.
Monday, the 19 thday of October, 2020
SESSIONS CASE NO. 6 OF 2018
(Split up from S.C. No.225 OF 2016) (On committal by I-Addl. Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Karimnagar by her Order in PRC No.114 of 2015, dt.18.04.2016).
Name of the Complainant: The State through the Sub Divisional Police Officer, Karimnagar (Cr. No.206/2015 of P.S., Karimnagar-II Town).
Name of the Accused: A1 : Kadari Parsharamulu, S/o Yellaiah, aged 28 yrs., Caste : Kurma, R/o Gattubuthkur Village of Gangadhara Mandal.
Charges: Under Sec.498-A and 304-B of IPC.
Plea of the Accused: “Not guilty”
Finding of the Court: “Not guilty“
Sentence or Order: A1 is found not guilty for the offences punishable under Sec.498-A and 304-B of IPC., and accordingly he is acquitted under Sec.235 (1) Cr. PC.
Prosecution conducted by: Sri M. Surender, Public Prosecutor, Prl.
Sessions Court, Karimnagar.
Accused defended by: Sri E. Madhusudhan Rao, Advocate.
This case coming before me for hearing, upon perusing the material on record, upon duly considering the same, after hearing the arguments of Sri E. Madhusudhan Rao, Counselfor A1 and the incharge learned Public Prosecutor, Sessions Court, Karimnagar for the State, this Court passed the following:-
-: J U D G M E N T :-
2FAIR This S.C. No.6/2018 against A1 is a split up case from the original case in S.C. No.225/2016 which ended in acquittal of A2 for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 304-B of IPC., and Sec.4 of Dowry
Prohibition Act, by judgment dated 09.07.2018.
2.Since at the time of framing of charges in S.C. No.225/2016, A1 was absconding, proclamation proceedings under Sec.82 of Cr. PC. were issued and as A1 has no immoveable properties, his case is split up from S.C.
No.225/2016 (which continued against A2 only) and his case is numbered afresh as the present S.C. No.6/2018.
3.On execution of NBW against him, A1 is produced in this case and after framing of charges, trial against him was conducted in this case.
4.For adjudicating the guilt or otherwise of A1 for the charges framed against him under Sec.498-A and 304-B of IPC., the averments of Charge
Sheet filed by the Sub Divisional Police Officer, Karimnagar in Cr.
No.206/2015 of P.S. Karimnagar-II Town are enumerated as under :-
a)On 13.06.2015 at 0900 hours to 1630 hours, the complainant Karre Raja
Mallaiah, lodged a petition, stating that he is the resident of Vidyanagar,
Karimnagar and eking out his livelihood by doing coolie. He had two daughters and two sons and on 22.06.2014 the marriage of his second daughter
Rajitha, 25 yrs., was performed with one Kadari Parsharamulu of Gattubuthkur
Village of Gangadhara Mandal. At the time of marriage the name of her daughter was changed as Rupa at her in-laws’ house. At the time of marriage he gave net cash of Rs.50,000/-, one gunta of land at Vidyanagar, Karimnagar and other household articles to the husband of his daughter towards dowry.
After the marriage, they lived amicably for three months and later his son-in- 3FAIR law and Kadari Ellamma, mother-in-law started harassing his daughter physically and mentally for additional dowry of Rs.1 lakh. His daughter informed the same to him several times, on that he expressed his inability to provide additional dowry to the husband and mother-in-law of his daughter and requested his son-in-law to look after his daughter well. Due to the unbearable harassment of husband of his daughter and mother-in-law of his daughter for
additional dowry, her daughter went to the house of his sister Chitkuri Ellavva,
R/o Vannaram and stayed there for few days. Two days back, he rented a house at Vidyanagar and kept his daughter and son-in-law in that portion by expecting a change in the mindset of his son-in-law. But his son-in-law did not change his mind and continued harassing his daughter for additional dowry of Rs.1 lakh and also abused and beat her with hands. Due to the continuous harassment of his son-in-law on 13.06.2015 at 0600 hours his daughter left the house and came to his house, noticing his daughter’s grief in the face he said to her that he will talk to her husband when he visits his house. Later, all the family members went to the fields to attend the coolie work at 0900 hours and at 1630 hours when his younger son Karre Sanjeev returned to home, found his daughter dead by hanging to a ceiling fan in his house. Immediately his son informed the same to him and knowing the same, he rushed to his house and found his daughter dead. Therefore he requested to take necessary action against the husband and mother-in-law of his daughter.
b) On receipt of the above, LW.13 registered a case in Cr. No.206/2015
U/s 304-B IPC., issued FIRs to all concerned and took up the investigation.
Later the LW.14 took up the investigation of this case, and sent a requisition to
LW.10 Tahsildar, Karimnagar for holding inquest over the corpse of the deceased. Accordingly, LW.14 visited the Govt. Headquarters Hospital,
Karimnagar and the (LW.10) EM & Tahsildar, Karimnagar also visited the
Hospital Mortuary and held inquest over the corpse of the deceased before the
LWs.7 to 9 by securing the presence of marginally noted witnesses, then 4FAIR LW.14 got photographed the dead body of the deceased by LW.6, and the
Tahsildar (LW.10) subjected the dead body of the deceased for autopsy by the team of doctors (LW.11 & 12), accordingly they conducted autopsy over the corpse of the deceased, examined and recorded the statements of LWs.2 to 6 in
Part-II case diaries. Later the LW.14 visited the scene of offence at H.No.10- 2-599, Vidyanagar, Karimnagar along with the same panchas, and observed the scene minutely for incriminating material evidence in the scene of offence, seized sari with which the deceased had committed suicide, under cover of
Crime Details Form in the presence of mediators. Later, LW.14 collected the
PME report from Dist. Govt. Civil Hospital, Karimnagar and the team of doctors (Lady Medical Officers) (LW.11 & LW.12) has issued opinion stating that the cause of death “Death due to asphyxia due to hanging”. The accused
A-2 Kadari Yellamma, W/o Yellaiah, aged 45 yrs., Caste : Kurma, R/o
Gattubuthkur Village of Gangadhara Mandal surrendered before the Hon’ble
Prl. Sessions Court, Karimnagar and the Hon’ble Court has ordered her to be released on bail by the orders vide Crl. M.P. No.657 of 2015, dt.10.07.2015 on executing a bond for a surety. The accused released on bail vide Dis. No.1326, dt.13.07.2015. A-1 Kadari Parsharamulu, S/o Yellaiah, age 28 yrs., Caste :
Kurma, R/o Gattubuthkur Village of Gangadhara Mandal surrendered before the Hon’ble Prl. Sessions Court, Karimnagar and the Hon’ble Court has ordered him to be released on bail by order vide Crl. M.P. No.795 of 2015, dt.05.08.2015 on his executing a bond for a surety and he was released on bail.
c) From the facts during the course of investigation it has come to light that after the marriage, the deceased and A1 lived amicably for three months and later the A1 & A2 started harassing the deceased physically and mentally for additional dowry of Rs.1 lakh. The deceased informed the same to LW.1 several times, on that LW.1 expressed his inability to provide additional dowry to A1 & A2 and requested the A1 to look after his daughter well. Due to the 5FAIR unbearable harassment of the A1 & A2 the deceased went to the house of
LW.5 and stayed there for few days. Then LW.1 rented a house at
Vidyanagar, Karimnagar and kept the A1 and deceased in that portion by expecting a change in the mindset of the A1. But the A1 did not change his mind and continued harassing the deceased for additional dowry of Rs.1 lakh and also abused and beat the deceased with hands. Due to the continuous harassment of the A1 & A2, the deceased vexed over her life and on 13.06.2015 at 0600 hours left her rented house and went to the house of LW.1.
and committed suicide by hanging to a ceiling fan in their house. Thus, the offence against the A1 & A2 is proved u/s 304-B IPC.
5.As indicated above, A1 was shown absconding at the time of framing of charges in S.C. No.225/2016, the present case is split up and on his appearance, charges under Sec.498-A of IPC. and Sec.304-B of IPC., are framed against him on 31.10.2019 and explained to him for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
6.In order to establish the guilt of A1, the prosecution has examined
PWs.1 to 8 and got marked Exs.P-1 to P-6 and M.O.1 on its behalf. No oral or documentary evidence is adduced on behalf of A1.
7.After the closure of the prosecution evidence, A1 was examined under
Sec.313 of Cr. PC., with reference to the incriminating evidence found against him in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. A1 denied the same and reported no defence evidence on his behalf.
8.Heard the learned In-charge Public Prosecutor on behalf of the prosecution and the learned counsel for A1 and perused the material on record.
6FAIR
9.Having regard to the divergent submissions, the following points would emerge for determination :-
1) Whether the prosecution has established that A1 along with his mother A-2, has harassed his wife, who is the deceased, namely, Smt. Rajitha @ Rupa, both mentally and physically for additional dowry of Rs.1,00,000/- ?
2) Whether the prosecution has established that unable to bear the demand of additional dowry of Rs.1,00,000/-, the deceased Smt. Rajitha @ Rupa, committed suicide by hanging on 13.06.2015 at her parents’ house situated at Vidyanagar, Karimnagar ?
3) Whether the prosecution has established the guilt of A1 for the offences punishable under Sec.498-A and 304-B of IPC., beyond all reasonable doubt ?
4) To what relief ?
10.POINTS No.1 to 3 :-The gravamen of the charge leveled against A1, which is discernible from the material on record is that A1 being the husband of the deceased Smt. Rajitha @ Rupa whose marriage took place on 22.06.2014, has harassed her mentally and physically to bring additional dowry of Rs.1,00,000/- and unable to meet the said demand, she has committed suicide by hanging on 13.06.2015 at her parents’ house situated at Vidyanagar,
Karimnagar within seven years of her marriage and thereby A1 is liable to be punished for the offences under Sec.498-A and 304-B of IPC.
11.In order to establish the charges leveled against A1, the initial burden is on the prosecution to prove that the deceased Smt. Rajitha @ Rupa has died an unnatural death within seven years of her marriage and her death is on account of physical and mental harassment and cruelty meted out to her by A1, for the demand of additional dowry of Rs.1,00,000/-. To ascertain these aspects, the 7FAIR testimony of the witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution requires to be scrutinized with due care and caution.
12.The admitted facts which are borne out by the record are that the marriage of A1 with the deceased Smt. Kadari Rajitha @ Rupa took place on 22.06.2014. It is also not in dispute that Smt. Kadari Rajitha @ Rupa died an unnatural death by committing suicide by hanging on 13.06.2015. The postmortem examination report under Ex.P-4 coupled with the testimony of
PW.5, the Lady Medical Officer who conducted postmortem examination over the dead body of the deceased, clearly demonstrate that the deceased has committed suicide and died due to Asphyxia due to hanging.
13.PW.1 is father of the deceased Smt. Kadari Rajitha @ Rupa. He lodged Ex.P-1 report on 13.06.2015 to PW.7-B. Chandra Shekar, S.I. of Police,
Karimnagar-II Town P.S. basing on which, he registered a case in Cr.
No.206/2015 under Sec.304-B of IPC., and issued Ex.P-5 F.I.R.
14.PW.1 in his chief-examination has testified that he performed the marriage of the deceased Rajitha with A1 on 22.06.2014, gave Rs.50,000/- towards dowry and also Ac.0-01 gt., of land apart from household articles, they both lived happily for about three months, the mother of A1, who is A2, was also living with them, three months thereafter his deceased daughter came to their house and told him that A1 was harassing her to bring additional dowry of
Rs.1,00,000/- and when he expressed his inability, the deceased went to his elder sister’s house situated at Vannaram Village and thereafter he brought her to his house, took one room for rent for the stay of the deceased and A1, on 13.06.2015, at about 06.00 A.M., his daughter came to him and complained that there is no change in A1, he was harassing her, then he told her to remain in their house and at about 04.30 P.M., in the evening, when his younger son 8FAIR K. Sanjeev returned home, found the doors locked from inside, as there was no response, he broke the doors, went into the house and noticed the dead body of the deceased hanging to the ceiling. Then, on information given by him, they came down and found the dead body of the deceased.
15.PW.1 in his cross-examination has stated that the accused are natives of Gattubuthkur Village, they (PW.1 family) are not related to each other before the marriage, they enquired with the neighbours about the family of the accused, A1 told that he is illiterate, within ten days after they settled the marriage, they performed the marriage. PW.1 further stated in his cross- examination that after three months from the date of marriage, his daughter came to his house alleging that the accused was harassing her to bring money.
He further stated that since A1 and his deceased daughter wanted to settle at
Karimnagar, he has taken a room at Karimnagar for their stay and after one day of A1 and his daughter set up residence at Karimnagar, his daughter committed suicide. He admitted that he did not complain against the accused to the
Sarpanch of Gattubuthkur Village and did not complain against the accused on the alleged demand for dowry to elders or police, and that he did not register one gunta of land in the name of anyone. He denied a suggestion that he did not give the dowry of Rs.50,000/- and one gunta of land to A1. He denied a suggestion that the deceased was not at all harassed by the accused but she was coming to their house at Karimnagar from Gattubuthkur Village because it was a Village and Karimnagar is a Town where she was born and brought up. He further denied another suggestion that since he was insisting his daughter to go to her husband’s house which she did not like and therefore, she died. He stated that after coming from the fields, they broke opened the doors and his son did not break open the doors of his house, but he stated in his evidence in
S.C. No.225/2016 that his son broke opened the door and saw the dead body of the deceased.
9FAIR
16.PW.2 is the younger brother of the deceased Rajitha and son of PW.1.
He has also testified in his chief-examination on the lines of PW.1 and stated that at the time of marriage of A1 with the deceased Rajitha, they gave
Rs.50,000/- cash and Ac.0-01 gt., of land towards dowry, after the marriage, his sister joined the matrimonial house but A1 and A2 were harassing her demanding additional dowry of Rs.1,00,000/- and they expressed their inability to pay the said amount and sent her to matrimonial house. He has also stated that the deceased went to their paternal aunt Chitukuri Ellavva’s house and informed about the harassment of the accused. He stated in his chief- examination that they have taken a house on rent to provide residence for A1 and his sister hoping that A1 may change his attitude, but as there was no change, his sister committed suicide on 13.06.2015 by hanging to the ceiling fan.
17.In his cross-examination, PW.2 has stated that his sister died while she was studying M.B.A. first year, he does not know who were the elders that settled the marriage of his deceased sister with A1, he was not present at the time of the marriage and his father told them that A1 discontinued M.B.A.
Course and Multi Media Course. He admitted that no panchayath was convened relating to the harassment caused by the accused to the deceased.
He further stated that the house taken by them at Karimnagar for staying of A1 and the deceased is in the upstairs portion which is surrounded by residential houses and his sister used to attend classes in the College. He further admitted that A1 was attending to agriculture work as he owned Ac.3-00 gts., of land.
He nextly admitted that the land of one gunta said to have been given at the time of marriage of A1 with his sister was not given under registered document and it is in their possession only. He denied a suggestion that his deceased sister did not like to stay in Gattubuthkur Village, used to come to their house 10FAIR frequently and they were asking her to go and live with her husband on account of which she committed suicide, but not due to the alleged harassment of the accused. He admitted that by mistake he deposed in S.C. No.225/2016 that he broke opened the door and informed his father, and that after their arrival only they broke opened the doors and saw the dead body of the deceased hanging.
18.PW.3 is elder sister of PW.1. She testified in her chief-examination that the deceased Rajitha was given in marriage to A1 and Rs.50,000/- and Ac.0-01 gt., of land was given to A1, after marriage, the deceased joined A1 to lead matrimonial life, A2 also used to live along with them, three months after the marriage, A1 and A2 demanded the parents of the deceased to give
Rs.1,00,000/- for digging a borewell for water on the ground that one gunta of land was not given and it is also not sufficient for them, both A1 and A2 started beating and abusing the deceased for not bring dowry of Rs.1,00,000/- due to which, the deceased came to her house and stayed for about four or five days, but she did not inform to her parents. According to her, when A1 came to her house and quarreled with her, she requested him not to quarrel and sent the deceased along with him but even thereafter, he was harassing the deceased, then the parents of the deceased brought A1 and the deceased to Karimnagar, kept them in a rented house and A1 again quarreled with her for not bringing
Rs.1,00,000/- and she was in the house of PW.1 at that time and thereafter she came to know about the death of the deceased by hanging.
19.PW.3 in her cross-examination has stated that she does not remember that she has stated to the police about the accused asking for Rs.1,00,000/- for the purpose of laying borewell by stating that one gunta of land given is not sufficient. She further stated in her cross-examination that she does not know where the room was taken for rent in Karimnagar for the stay of the deceased and A1 by the parents of the deceased and she did not go to that room and she 11FAIR does not know as to what transpired between A1 and the deceased. She denied a suggestion that PW.1 giving cash of Rs.50,000/- and one gunta of land at the time of marriage of Rajitha with A1 is all falsehood. She also denied another suggestion that the deceased was not harassed by the accused, much less for alleged demand of Rs.1,00,000/- and the deceased did not like to live in
Gattubuthkur Village, as A1 was not educated, she did not like him and returned to her parents’ house and committed suicide.
20.PW.4 has testified that in his chief examination that in his presence, the police have conducted Crime Details Form under Ex.P-2, which is the scene of offence at the house of PW.1, along with one Karre Lingaiah (LW.8) and they have seized a Sari, which is marked as M.O.1. He further stated that the police have also conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased in his presence containing his signature and the inquest report is marked as Ex.P-3.
21.PW.4 in his cross-examination has denied that he has signed in Exs.P-2 and P-3 in police station but not in the house of PW.1 and M.O.1 was not seized by the police in his presence.
22.PW.6 is the Tahsildar, Karimnagar at the relevant point of time who conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased under Ex.P-3. He stated in his chief-examination that he went to Vidynagar, Karimnagar where the deceased has died and conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased
Karre Rupa @ Karre Rajitha under Ex.P-3, which is already marked.
23.In his cross-examination, PW.6 has admitted that Ex.P-3 inquest report is in the handwriting of the Police Constable and there is no mention in it that it was scribed on his dictation and he further admitted that he did not record the statements of the witnesses mentioned in Ex.P-3.
12FAIR
24.PW.8 was the Sub Divisional Police Officer, Karimnagar at the relevant point of time who filed Charge Sheet in this case. He stated in his chief- examination that after receiving information from PW.7, he went to the scene of offence, gave a requisition to PW.6 to conduct inquest over the dead body of the deceased, then he got the dead body photographed and also got conducted inquest over the dead body and the photographs and C.D. are marked as
Ex.P-6. He further stated that after collecting postmortem examination report, he filed the Charge Sheet.
25.In his cross-examination, PW.8 has admitted that the scene of offence is surrounded by residential houses but he did not examine anyone living in the said houses, he did not examine the elders who acted as mediators and settled the marriage of the deceased with A1. He further stated in his cross- examination as under :- “I have not made any effort to go to the native village of the accused or to enquire with anyone. I did not examine the owners or the neighbours of the accused and did not collect any information as to the residence of A1 or about the time of death of the deceased. I did not verify or investigate from the angle of educational qualification of A1 and his profession and also about the deceased. It is not true to suggest that the deceased did not like A1 as her husband since she was highly qualified and that A1 was an illiterate and as such she committed suicide and not because of any harassment. It is not true to suggest that the accused did not harass the deceased for additional dowry and that the accused are no way concerned for the death of the deceased and never harassed her. It is not true to suggest that I did not conduct proper investigation and filed Charge Sheet in this case though the accused is innocent of the offence.”
26.The learned Public Prosecutor has given up the evidence of LW.2 Karre
Beeramma and LW.4 Karre Venkatesh, who are shown as circumstantial witnesses and LW.12 Dr. Laxmi Devi, R.M.O., Govt. Civil Hospital,
Karimnagar, who conducted postmortem examination over the dead body of the deceased. The evidence of LW.6 Chinthala Raji Reddy, who is photographer, is closed on the ground that he has died. Further, the learned 13FAIR Public Prosecutor has also given up the evidence of LWs.7 and 8, who are other panch witnesses for inquest and Crime Details Form.
27.Thus, it is apparent from the testimony of PWs.1 to 3 that though A1 was given a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards dowry at the time of marriage of the deceased Rajitha with him along with Ac.0-01 gt., of land, but PWs.1 and 2 in their cross-examination have stated that the said land was not registered in the name of A1 and further PW.2 has admitted in his cross-examination that the said land of Ac.0-01 gt., is in their possession only. Nextly, it is apparent that
PW.1 is the father, PW.2 is the younger brother and PW.3 is the paternal aunt of the deceased, and except these witnesses, the prosecution has not examined any of the caste elders who have settled the marriage, as admitted by PW.2 in his cross-examination, to establish about the fixation of dowry of Rs.50,000/- which was said to have been given by PW.1 to A1 at the time of his marriage with the deceased Rajitha.
28.The testimony of PW.8, the Sub Divisional Police Officer, who conducted investigation and filed Charge Sheet in this case, as extracted above, shows that he has not examined any of the local residents near the house of
PW.1 where the deceased has committed suicide. Further, PW.8 has not examined the neighbours or owners of the house of the accused and he did not collect information about the residence of A1 at the time of the death of the deceased and he has also not investigated to ascertain the educational qualification and vocation of A1. PW.2 in his cross-examination has admitted that A1 was attending to agriculture work as he owned Ac.3-00 gts., of land.
The prosecution for the reasons best known to it, has not specifically placed any material on record as to the alleged acts of cruelty and harassment or the dates on which the deceased was harassed by A1 and subjected her to cruelty for bringing additional dowry of Rs.1,00,000/-. Moreover, though PW.3 in her 14FAIR cross-examination has stated that A1 has abused and beaten the deceased for not bringing the cash of Rs.1,00,000/- due to which, the deceased came to her house and stayed for about four or five days, it is incomprehensible as to why
PW.3 has not informed this aspect of the matter to PW.1. It is but natural on the part of an elder in the family when any harassment takes place for
additional dowry to anyone of their near relatives, the same would be informed
to the parents of the victim and some sort of talks would be initiated to amicably settle the matter in the larger interest of matrimonial well being of the girl. However, PW.3 has not stated that she has taken recourse to any of these steps in informing PW.1, who is her younger brother and father of the deceased in this regard while the deceased was staying in her house.
29.Further, a careful scrutiny of the testimony of PWs.1 to 3 do not in any way specifically mention the dates or the specific acts of harassment and cruelty said to have been committed by A1 against the deceased for demanding
additional dowry amount of Rs.1,00,000/- as the said alleged harassment
according to them took place within three months from the date of marriage of
A1 with the deceased.
30.The learned counsel for A1 has placed reliance on a decision of the
Hon’ble High Court of A.P. reported in VAMPU ABBURAMULU AND
ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH {2011 (1) ALD (Crl.)
337 (A.P)} in which it is held that the reasons for a woman to commit suicide may be many and not only cruelty or harassment concerning demand of
additional dowry and the Court has to properly assess the real cause of
unnatural death of a woman on a thorough scrutiny of evidence on record without being swayed away by mere fact of unnatural death of a woman.
Reliance is also placed by the learned counsel for A1 on a decision of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in AMAR SINGH VS STATE OF
15FAIR RAJASTHAN {2010 (2) ALD (Crl.) 811} in which the Hon’ble Supreme
Court held that mere demand of dowry is not sufficient under Sec.304-B and 498-A of IPC., but it must be shown that soon before her death, the deceased was subjected by the accused to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand of dowry. Further, reliance is also placed on another decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court by the learned counsel for A1 reported in SHER SINGH ALIAS PRATAPA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA {2015 (2)
ALD (Crl.) 362 (SC)} in which the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that atleast by preponderance of probabilities, the prosecution has to establish that the deceased was treated with cruelty in connection with the demand of dowry.
Lastly, the learned counsel for A1 has relied upon the recent decision of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in STATE OF HARYANA Vs. ANGOORI
DEVI AND ANOTHER {2020 (2) ALD (Crl.) 350 (SC)} in which it is held that the prosecution cannot escape from discharging its burden of proving harassment or cruelty relating to demand for dowry soon before the death of the deceased under Sec.304-B of IPC.
31.In view of the ratio laid down in the above judicial pronouncements, if the material on record is analyzed, it is discernible that PWs.1 to 3 have not specifically spoken about the overt acts committed by A1 in harassing and subjecting the deceased to cruelty in connection with demand of additional dowry of Rs.1,00,000/-. No such specific instances have been narrated by
PWs.1 to 3 relating to the cruel acts of harassment inflicted upon the deceased demanding additional dowry of Rs.1,00,000/-. Nextly, PWs.1 and 2 though have stated that A1 has demanded additional dowry of Rs.1,00,000/-, but PW.3 has stated that such Rs.1,00,000/- was demanded by the accused to dig a borewell for water on the ground that one gunta of land offered was not given and it was not sufficient for the accused. There is no explanation by PWs.1 to 3 as to why they have not given the alleged one gunta of land to A1 as dowry at 16FAIR the time of his marriage with the deceased. Moreover, though the house of A1 was surrounded with other houses, the Investigation Officers, PWs.7 and 8, have not examined any of the neighbouring persons or the mediators who settled the marriage to demonstrate that the dowry of Rs.50,000/- was given to
A1, and that he was harassing the deceased and subjecting her to cruelty demanding additional amount of Rs.1,00,000/- towards dowry.
32.On a conspectus of the above material on record, this Court is of the view that the prosecution though proved the death of the deceased Rajitha @
Rupa as an unnatural death, which took place within seven years of her marriage, but the material on record adduced by the prosecution falls short of proving that she has died due to the cruelty and harassment by her husband A-1 demanding additional dowry. Thus, the prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of A1 for the offences punishable under Sec.498-A and 304-B of IPC., beyond all reasonable doubt. Therefore, this Court holds that A1 cannot be found guilty for the said offences and he is entitled for acquittal on the ground of benefit of doubt. These points are answered accordingly.
33.POINT No.4 :- In the result, A1 is found not guilty for the offences punishable under Sec.498-A and 304-B of IPC., and he is accordingly acquitted under Sec.235 (1) of Cr. PC. The bail bonds and surety bonds of A1 shall remain in force till the expiry of appeal time. M.O.1 shall be destroyed after the expiry of appeal time.
Dictated to the Stenographer in part, transcribed by him, partly typed, corrected
and pronounced by me in the Open Court, on this the 19 th day of October, 2020.
I-Addl. Sessions Judge, FAC : Prl. Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
FOR THE PROSECUTION :
17FAIR
PW.1Karre Raja Mallaiah. PW.2Karre Sanjeev. PW 3Chitkuri Ellavva. PW.4Mogulla Srinivas PW.5Dr. P. Lavanya, Civil Asst. Surgeon. PW.6Sri M. Jayachandra Reddy, Tahsildar. PW.7Sri B. Chandra Shekhar, S.I. of Police. PW.8Sri J. Rama Rao, Sub Divisional Police Officer
FOR THE DEFENCE : -NONE –
EXHIBITS MARKED
FOR THE PROSECUTION:
Ext.P1Dt.13.06.2015Attested copy of complaint/report of PW.1 Ext.P2Dt.13.06.2015Attested copy of Crime Details Form. Ext.P3Dt.14.06.2015Attested copy of Inquest Report. Ext.P4Dt.14.06.2015Attested copy of Post Mortem Examination Report Ext.P5Dt.13.06.2015Attested copy of F.I.R. in Cr. No.206/2015 of Karimnagar-II Town P.S. Ext.P6--Eight (8) Photographs of the dead body of the deceased along with C.D.
FOR THE DEFENCE : - Nil -
MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED
M.O.1 : Saree of the deceased.
I-Addl. Sessions Judge, FAC : Prl. Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.
-:-