Full Judgment
2. In order to prove the charge against the accused, the prosecution has examined in all PWs - 1 to 13 and got marked Exs.P). to P9 and produced MO - 1, saree used for commission of suicide.
The defence of the accused is one of total denial. Thereafter, after iisaring the prosecution and the defence, the learned Sessions Judge was pleased to hold that the evidence adduced by the prosecution is not sufficient to prove the case of cruelty or harassment. Hence, he has acquitted the accused of the charges levelled against them. The State has challenged the judgement of acquittal.
3. The prosecution in this case commenced with the filing of the complaint by PW-1 Naushad Pasha who is brother of the deceased, who has stated that his sister was given in marriage to Chand Pasha , Accused No.3 about 4 years prior to her death according to the Islamic rites and at the time of the marriage, the accused No.3 had demanded cash of Rs. 12,0X30/- as dowry and a ring of 08 gms and one HMT watch arid his sister was given
33 grams of etir rings, 25 paire of clothes and other house-hold article required for a family. It is stated in the complaint that after the marriage, the accused No.3 was not having any avocation and therefore, he has given Rs.50,900/- to his sister for purchasing an Auto rickshaw to accused No.3. Inspite of that, the accused were not looking after his sister properly and were pestering her to bring money from her parents. Even during the marriage of brother-in-law of his sister/ deceased Smt.Haseena, the accused have demanded money and at that time, both his sister and her husband started living in a separate house. Ins pits of the aforesaid assistance given by him, A3 had sold the Auto rickshaw given by him without informing them and thereafter, he has squandered the money, Thereafter, he was demanding money for purchase of another Auto rickshaw and also for building e. house of his own. Hence, his sister has committed suicide, which was informed to him on J 8.10,2000, where after he went to Ananda Nursing Home along with his sister but since the hospital authorities refused to take the injured for treatment, his sister was taken to Victoria Hospital where sits was pronounced brought dead". He has stated that the death of his sister is due to the physical and mental ill-treatment giver by the accused persona. Hence, he requested for action. Based on the said complaint, the police haw registered the case, investigated the offence and the charge sheet has been filed against the four accused. During the trial, PW-1 Naushad Pasha has stated as per the complaint before the police.
However, in the cross-examination, he has not stated as to in what manner he could pool the amount of Rs.50,000/- for purchasing an Auto ricks haw for accused No.3.
PW-2 Pyaarejan is the father of the deceased Smt,Haseena Bhanu. He has also stated regarding the ill-treatment by the accused No.3 in his house to his daughter. However, he has clearly stated that, there was no discussion before the marriage. He has stated that, since the accused was carrying on his shop, he had given his daughter to the accused. However, he was fighting with wife.
PW-3 Ay as ha Fathima is the sister-in-law of the deceased. She has also stated regarding the ill-treatment given by the accused No.3 in his house after the marriage to the deceased Haseena.
PW-4 Dr.K.H.Manjunath had conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body of the deceased Haseena.
PW-5 Smt.Maqbool Jan is the maternal aunt of the deceased. However, she has not been subjected to cross-examination.
PW-6 Mehboob Pasha is another brother of the deceased. He has also stated regarding the payment of a Bum Rs. 10,000/- and the demand made by accused No.3 before the marriage. He has also stated regarding ill-treatment to his sister in her husband's house. He has stated that his brother had taken a loan of Rs.50,000/-and purchased an Auto rickshaw and gave it to accused No.3. However, in the cross-examination, he has stated that he cannot say from whom his brother has taken the loan.
PW-7 Venkataramana is the Constable who has traced the accused and apprehended him and produced before the Investigating Officer.
PW-8 SmtJayalakshmi is the Head Constable who has apprehended accused Jamraela @ Jameela Begum and produced before the Investigating Officer.
PW-9 Shivaraju has turned hostile to the case of the prosecution.
PW-10 is the signatory to Ex.P6, which is a notice and Ex.P7 the inquest ma hazeJ.
PW-11 Ziaulla is another family member who has stated that at the beginning, the deceased was being looked after well and thereafter she was being ill-treated by her husband's family. PW-12 is the inspector of police who has registered the case as per Ex.P3 and issued FIR as per Ex.P8. He has got inquest conducted by the Executive Magistrate as per Ex.P6. Ex.FS is the seizure mahazar for seizing the saree MOl. He has arrested the accused persons and produced before the Court.
PW-13 K.M.Muddaiah is the Investigating Officer what has completed the investigation and has filed the charge sheet against the accused persons. It is from the evidence of these witnesses and the materials produced before the Court, the learned Sessions Judge has found that, there is no clinching evidence to show that there was demand for dowry and has acquitted the accused of the charges levelled against them.
4. Heard Sri.N.S.Samparjgirameiah, learned HCGP and Sri.K.S.A.Keddy and K.S.C.Gowda, learned counsels for the ieapondentb. Perused the materials carefully.
5. It is seen that, from the complaint and evidence of the two brothers of the deceased, there is contradiction regarding the holding of marriage talks before the marriage. One of the brothers categorically states that there were absolutely no talks before the marriage. One of the brothers PW-2 Pyare Jan states that, there was no negotiations before the marriage, whereas PW-1 Naushad Pasha and other witnesses says that the accused have demanded and accepted dowry of Rs. 12,000/-. So far as demand and accepting of Rs,50,000/ - in the form of an Auto ricks haw from PW-1, the prosecution has not proved the source of FW-l for purchasing an Auto rickshaw and. giving it to the accused. Further, it is the case of the prosecution that, accused No.3 has sold the said Auto rickshaw and squandered the money. Since the Auto rickshaw bears a registration number and its ownership can be proved by means of documents namely, the registration certificate or extract from RTO, the prosecution could have produced those documents to show that Prl-j. Had infect purchased an Auto rickshaw and given it to Accused No.3. Similarly, for selling Auto rickshaw, there can definitely be some documents to impute squandering of money by A-3. In the absence of these documents, the prosecution case cannot be believed regarding Accused No.3 demanding money for an Auto rickshaw and payment of money by PW-1 to Accused No.3 in the form of an Auto rickshaw.
Further, there is a feeble averment in the evidence that the accused was asking money for building the house. No particulars of the said house have been produced by the prosecution before the Court to show that there was some property on which a house had to be constructed. So far as the ill-treatment and. harassment caused to the deceased soon before her death for the purpose of demanding dowry or money, there is no clinching evidence produced by the prosecution.
6. We have gone through the judgment of the trial Court The reasoning given by the learned Sessions Judge for acquitting the respondents is sound and proper and is based on the evidence on record. The said reasonings are neither capricious nor against settled principles of law. Under the circumstances, we do not see any pressing reasons to reverse the findings of the learned Sessions Judge and in that view of the matter we hold that this appeal is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed