Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 1191 (AP)

Public Prosecutor v. S. Shivashankar

2004-10-13

P.S.NARAYANA

body2004
( 1 ) THIS criminal appeal is filed as against the acquittal recorded in Sessions Case No. 87 of 1995 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge at Sangareddy, dated 26-06-1998. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Woman Protection Cell, C. I. D. , Hyderabad, filed charge sheet against the respondents-accused for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 498-A, 304-B of the Indian Penal Code (for short the Code) and Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. ( 2 ) THE case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the marriage of Vandana (herein after referred to as deceased) was celebrated with A1 on 20-11-1992 and both of them were living together along with A2-the mother of A1. At the time of marriage, the parents of the deceased presented 5 tulas of gold, steel cot, silver vessels, steel almyrah, folding dining table with 4 chairs, household articles, Bajaj scooter and Rs. 30,000/- cash for clothes. After the marriage, the accused harassed the deceased for bringing more amount and she returned three times to her parents house within a period of one and half months. The accused used to harass the deceased not only to bring money but also for decolum cot and gas cylinder as gifts. Due to the harassment made by the accused, the deceased died by setting herself ablaze. On a complaint, a case in Crime No. 11 of 1993 under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was registered by the Police Station, Narayanguda. The Mandal Revenue Officer conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased and he also recorded the dying declaration of the deceased. During the course of investigation, it was established that the deceased was harassed by A1 before her death for want of dowry and she died with burn injuries within seven years of her marriage. ( 3 ) THE learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Sangareddy, committed the case to the Court of Session and on appearance of the accused, a charge under Section 304-B of the Code was framed and the accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined P. Ws 1 to 15 and got marked Exs. P1 to P11 on its behalf and also Ex. D1 and D2 were marked on behalf of accused. The prosecution examined P. Ws 1 to 15 and got marked Exs. P1 to P11 on its behalf and also Ex. D1 and D2 were marked on behalf of accused. The learned Judge, after recording the reasons in detail, found the accused not guilty of an offence under Section 304-B of the Code and recorded and acquittal. Hence, the appeal. ( 4 ) THE learned Additional Public Prosecutor would contend that A1 married the deceased and had taken the dowry, and after the marriage also he had been demanding more money and gifts as additional dowry and began harassing and ill-treating her, and as a result, the deceased committed suicide within two months of her marriage. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would also contend that the death was within seven years of her marriage and hence, the presumption is available under Section 113-b of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (for short the Act ). The learned Additional Public Prosecutor also would submit that the evidence available on record is clear, cogent and consisting relating to the demand of dowry and the harassment by A1 on the deceased. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor also would contend that the dying declarations, on which a strong reliance was placed by the learned Judge in recording an acquittal, had been made by the deceased due to the influence of the accused over the deceased at the relevant point of time and hence, in view of both the Sections 113 (a) and 113 (b) of the Act, the accused are to be found guilty and the findings are to be reversed. ( 5 ) SRI. Praveen Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents, on contrary would contend that the learned Judge appreciated the evidence available on record, recorded the findings in detail and ultimately, recorded an acquittal and even with regard to the harassment, the evidence of P. Ws. 1, 2 and 12 also would not establish the same, at any rate, because they are interested witnesses. The learned counsel also would submit that in the light of Ex. P4-the dying declaration recorded by the duty doctor of Sangareddy hospital P. W. 8 and Ex. P-6 the dying declaration recorded by XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad-P. W. 14, it is clear that the death was due to sheer accident and nothing more. The learned counsel also would submit that in the light of Ex. P4-the dying declaration recorded by the duty doctor of Sangareddy hospital P. W. 8 and Ex. P-6 the dying declaration recorded by XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad-P. W. 14, it is clear that the death was due to sheer accident and nothing more. ( 6 ) P. W. 1 the mother of the deceased deposed about the celebration of marriage and as per the demand of the accused she gave 5 tulas of gold, Rs. 10,000/- for purchase of clothes, Rs. 20,000/- for purchase of scooter, Rs. 4,000/- for utensils and also dining table, cot and got celebrated the marriage of her daughter with A1. This witness also deposed that after the marriage, the deceased and A1 had gone to Sadasivpet and after four days they both came to their house and her daughter told her that there are no mirrors to the almyrah and no decolum to the dining table and also to the cot and the above articles were demanded by the accused. She further deposed that she told her daughter that her father was sick and she will pacify A1. She had also further deposed about the Sankranthi festival. She sent her son to call her daughter and A1 to celebrate Sankranthi festival, but their house was locked and her son wrote a letter and dropped in their house and came back. She further deposed that on the next day, when they were waiting for the arrival of the deceased and A1, one of their relatives received a telephone message that the deceased received burn injuries and was admitted in Gandhi hospital, then they went and shifter her to CDR hospital, but after two days she died. This witness also deposed that when her daughter visited their hose, she stated to her that the accused are demanding Rs. 40,000/- for the purpose of securing a job to A1. Hence, she lodged a complaint-Ex. P1. ( 7 ) P. W. 3 is the paternal uncle of the deceased. P. W. 4 and P. W,5 are the brothers of the deceased. 40,000/- for the purpose of securing a job to A1. Hence, she lodged a complaint-Ex. P1. ( 7 ) P. W. 3 is the paternal uncle of the deceased. P. W. 4 and P. W,5 are the brothers of the deceased. P. W. 2 deposed that A1 is her husbands younger brother and on the date of accident, at about 6-00 P. M. , when they returned from the fields, the deceased told them that she will bring tea to them and went inside the house, and then as her saree caught fire she started cries. She further deposed that by the time herself, her husband and A2 went, the deceased was almost on fire and A1 came over there and tried to cover blanket on her. They took the deceased to Sadasivpet hospital and from there to Sangareddy hospital. P. W. 6 is the Mandal Revenue Officer, who conducted the inquest over the dead body of the deceased on 14-1-1993, deposed about the conducting of panchanama in the presence of P. Ws. 1 and 3 and Ex. P2 is the panchanama, which contains the opinion of the witnesses. P. W. 7 is the Professor, forensic Department, who conducted autopsy on the dead body of the deceased, deposed that the deceased died due to burn injuries. P. W. 8. is the panch witness for the inquest panchanama Ex. P2 and she signed on it. P. W. 9 is the doctor, who had given treatment to the deceased and recorded her dying declaration, which is Ex. P4 P. W. 10 is the retired Head Clerk of Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Alampur, who had identified the signature of Metropolitan Magistrate, who recorded the dying declaration of he deceased. P. W. 11 is the doctor, who identified the signature of Ms. Rashmi, who worked under him, on the dying declaration Ex. P5. P. W. 12 is the paternal uncle of the deceased, who no doubt supported the version of P. W. 1, P. Ws. 3 to 5. P. W. 13 is the District Superintendent of Police, who investigated the case, deposed about the details of investigation. Rashmi, who worked under him, on the dying declaration Ex. P5. P. W. 12 is the paternal uncle of the deceased, who no doubt supported the version of P. W. 1, P. Ws. 3 to 5. P. W. 13 is the District Superintendent of Police, who investigated the case, deposed about the details of investigation. P. W. 14 deposed that as per the instructions of D. G. CID, he had taken up investigation in Crime No. 12 of 1993 under Section 304-B of the Code, visited Sadasivpet, examined the scene of offence and recorded the statements of witnesses and after receipt of medical certificate, and after completion of investigation, he filed charge sheet. P. W. 15 is the Head Constable, who deposed about receiving the complaint from P,. W. 1 and registering the case. ( 8 ) FROM a careful scrutiny of Ex. P4-the dying declaration recorded by the duty doctor of Sangareddy Government Hospital P. W. 8 and Ex. P6-the dying declaration recorded by the XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, it is clear that what had been deposed by P. Ws 1 to 5 and P. W. 12 definitely cannot be believed. The said dying declaration Ex. P4 reads as hereunder; ex. P6 reads as hereunder; ( 9 ) IN the light of the dying declarations made by the deceased herself, it is clear that the incident happened due to sheer accident. The version of the prosecution definitely cannot be believed. The learned Judge had recorded the reasons in detail and had given a clear fining that in view of the two dying declarations referred to supra, the harassment alleged and the consequent death styling it as dowry death by the prosecution cannot be sustained and on that ground, the evidence of the relations of the deceased had been disbelieved. ( 10 ) ON appreciation of the evidence of P. W. 1 to P. W. 15 and also Ex,p1 to P11 and Ex. D1- the portion of 161 Cr. P. C. statement of P. W. 3 and Ex. D2- the postal and card and cover by P. W. 4, the findings recorded by the learned Judge cannot be found fault in any way. D1- the portion of 161 Cr. P. C. statement of P. W. 3 and Ex. D2- the postal and card and cover by P. W. 4, the findings recorded by the learned Judge cannot be found fault in any way. Even, on re-appreciation of the evidence available on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that any other view is not possible and hence, the acquittal recorded by the learned Judge definitely is well justified in the facts and circumstances of the case and the findings recorded by the learned Judge are hereby confirmed and the appeal shall stand dismissed. Accordingly, the Criminal appeal is dismissed.