Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 301 (AP)

Madas Venkat Goud v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2010-04-13

GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA

body2010
JUDGMENT (1) The sole accused in SC No.167 of 2005 on the file of the I Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, is the appellant herein. The learned Judge tried the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 304-B IPC and 12(1)(b) of the Passports Act, 1967 (for short "the Act"). During the course of trial, on behalf of the prosecution, PWs.1 to 12 were examined and Exs.Pl to P9 were marked. On behalf of the defence, DW1 was examined and Ex.D1 was marked. After analyzing both oral and documentary evidence and after hearing both sides, the trial Court found the accused guilty of the offences, and accordingly, convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years for the offence under Section 304-B IPC, and also sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000.00 in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months, for the offence under Section 12(l)(b) of the Act. (2) The graveman of the charge against the accused is that at Saleem Nagar Colony, Prasanth Nagar, Malakpeta, Hyderabad, the accused subjected his wife Smt. Aravindasree, hereafter called the deceased, to cruelty and harassed her for additional dowry, on account of which, her health got deteriorated and ultimately she died on 27/9/2001. Further, the charge against the accused is that while obtaining a passport, he suppressed his marital status and did not mention the name of his wife, the deceased, in the application. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to as they are arrayed in the Sessions Case. (3) The case of the prosecution as culled out during the course of trial is as follows: (i) PW1, a doctor by profession, is the father of the deceased. The marriage between the deceased and the accused was performed on 30/1/1998 and at the time of marriage, an amount of Rs.3 lakh in cash, 60 tulas of gold, 20 tulas of silver, one residential building situated at Saleem Nagar Colony, a Maruthi Car, and other household articles, were given by way of dowry. After the marriage, both of them lived together happily for a period of six months, and subsequently, the accused got a seat in M.S. Course at Gandhi Medical College, Hyderabad. After joining in the said course, he used to bring girl friends to the house and behave indecently with the deceased. After the marriage, both of them lived together happily for a period of six months, and subsequently, the accused got a seat in M.S. Course at Gandhi Medical College, Hyderabad. After joining in the said course, he used to bring girl friends to the house and behave indecently with the deceased. Though the deceased objected the said conduct, the accused did not heed to her words and used to beat her mercilessly. (ii) In the month of December, 1999 on a telephone call from the accused, PW1, father of the deceased, rushed to their house and found the deceased doused in kerosene and he was informed by the deceased that the accused was demanding an amount of Rs.10 lakh to go abroad. Then, PW1 expressed his inability to meet the said demand, and when he warned the accused that he would report the matter to the police, the parents of the accused requested him not to lodge a report with the police, and further, the accused promised PW1 stating that he would look after the deceased well. Thereafter, PW1 used to send money to the accused for family expenses, since the financial condition of the accused was very week. (iii) In the month of February, 1999, the appellant obtained a passport and while making an application for passport, he suppressed his marital status stating that he is not married. As the accused was threatening the deceased that he would go abroad by leaving her, the said fact was brought to the notice of the passport authorities. (iv) In the month of March, 2000 the accused came to his house in drunken condition and forced the deceased to consume alcohol and when she refused, he beat her mercilessly and further tried to kill her by pressing her face with a pillow. When the same was informed by the deceased to PW1, he took her to his house. But, again on the request of the parents of the accused and on their assurance that the accused will look after the deceased well, the deceased was sent back to the accused. In spite of the same, the alleged harassment continued and a panchayat also was held wherein the accused and his parents promised that they would look after the deceased well. (v) On 25/5/2001 at about 2.00 p.m. the deceased went to Satya Hospital belonging to PW1 and complained health problems. In spite of the same, the alleged harassment continued and a panchayat also was held wherein the accused and his parents promised that they would look after the deceased well. (v) On 25/5/2001 at about 2.00 p.m. the deceased went to Satya Hospital belonging to PW1 and complained health problems. Thereafter, on instructions, she was immediately shifted to Medwin Hospital and she was under the care of a Cardiologist. When the said information was brought to the notice of the accused, he visited the hospital and spent just a couple of minutes with the deceased. After about 10 days, the deceased was discharged from Medwin Hospital on 4.6.2001 and brought back to Satya Hospital for further treatment. Though the said fact was brought to the notice of the accused, he did not visit her. (vi) On 27.9.2001 at 3.30 a.m. the deceased died in the hospital, while undergoing treatment. As the said death was in the hospital and it is a medico legal case, the said fact was informed to the Sub-Inspector of Police, Dabeerpura Police Station i.e. PW7, on that day itself and the same was numbered as a case in Crime No.92/2001 under Section 174 Cr.P.C. The report dated 27/9/2001 given by the father of the deceased was marked as Ex.P1 and the FIR was marked as Ex.P4. Immediately thereafter, the dead body was sent to Osmania General Hospital Mortuary, Hyderabad, for the purpose of post-mortem examination and the Mandal Revenue Officer of the concerned area, who was examined as PW5, at the request of PW7, held inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of PW4. The said inquest report was marked as Ex.P2. Subsequently, the Deputy Civil Surgeon of Osmania General Hospital, who was examined as PW6, held autopsy over the dead body of the deceased and opined that the cause of death was due to chronic heart disease. The said post-mortem report was marked as Ex.P3. PW7 recorded the statements of PW2 and other relevant witnesses, and on the basis of their statements, altered the section of law to Section 304-B. The FIR was altered by the Inspector of Police, who was examined as PW8. The said post-mortem report was marked as Ex.P3. PW7 recorded the statements of PW2 and other relevant witnesses, and on the basis of their statements, altered the section of law to Section 304-B. The FIR was altered by the Inspector of Police, who was examined as PW8. PW9 the Assistant Commissioner of Police, who is competent to investigate into the case, took over investigation from PWs.7 and 8 and directed them to collect relevant materials, such as wedding card, marriage photographs, passport of the accused, etc. The accused surrendered before PW9 on 14.11.2001 and immediately he was shown arrested and produced before the competent criminal Court and later he was remanded to judicial custody. After completion of investigation, PW9 filed charge-sheet. (vii) The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Mir Chowk Division, Hyderabad, who obtained sanctioned order to prosecute the accused under the Act, after completion of investigation, filed a supplementary charge sheet for the offence punishable under Section 12(1)(b) of the Act. It is mainly contended by the learned Senior Counsel Mr. Padmanabha Reddy that the offence alleged to have been committed by the accused does not fall under Section 304-B IPC for the reason that the main ingredients of Section 304-B IPC have not been satisfied. According to him, initially the crime was registered under Section 174 Cr.P.C. i.e., suspicious death, and subsequently, the case has been developed by the prosecution witnesses. The learned Senior Counsel further contended that there was no need for the accused to suppress any fact for obtaining passport and even if it is accepted that he suppressed the facts, it would not go to the root of the case for the reason that suppression of the facts in no way debars him from getting passport. (4) The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the said submissions and contended' that the Court below has properly weighed the entire evidence in coming to the conclusion that the accused is guilty of both the charges under Section 304-B IPC and Section 12(1)(b) of the Act and the said finding cannot be interfered with. (4) The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the said submissions and contended' that the Court below has properly weighed the entire evidence in coming to the conclusion that the accused is guilty of both the charges under Section 304-B IPC and Section 12(1)(b) of the Act and the said finding cannot be interfered with. It may be apt to refer to Section 304-B IPC which reads as under: "304-B. Dowry Death:-(I) Where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, such death shall be called "dowry death" and such husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death. Explanation:-For the purposes of this sub-section, "dowry" shall have the same meaning as in Section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (28 of 1961). (2) Whoever commits dowry death shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life." (5) From a reading of the said provision of law, it is required that the prosecution shall come forward and satisfy the following three requirements by cogent evidence: (1) The death had taken place within a span of seven years; (2) It is unnatural death; and (3) There was harassment by the husband and in-laws soon before the death. (6) As per the evidence of prosecution witnesses, the marriage between the deceased and the accused was performed on 30.11.1998 and the deceased left the company of the accused in the month of March 2000 and her death took place on 27.9.2001. From the above, it is evident that the death of the deceased had taken place within a span of 7 years. But as stated supra, the prosecution shall satisfy all the three requirements by way of cogent evidence to bring home the guilt of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 304-B IPC. The doctor, who conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased and issued Post-mortem Certificate marked as Ex.P3, clearly stated that the death of the deceased was natural. The doctor, who conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased and issued Post-mortem Certificate marked as Ex.P3, clearly stated that the death of the deceased was natural. The requirement as provided for under Section 304-B IPC is that it should be an unnatural death. Of course, if the said death is solely on account of the alleged harassment, presumption can be drawn in view of Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act. But here, we have to look into the fact that the accused and the deceased lived together only upto March 2000 and the alleged death took place on 27.9.2001 i.e., after 1 year. From that it cannot be inferred that there was harassment soon before her death. When once the doctor states that the death was (sic not) unnatural and there is no cogent evidence to establish that soon before the death of the deceased, there was harassment, in my considered view, it is not safe to hold that the accused is guilty of the offence punishable under Section 304-B IPC. Another aspect which is prompting this Court to come to the conclusion is the evidence. The alleged death took place on 27.9.2001 and as it was occurred in the hospital of PW1 i.e. father of the deceased, and it is a medico legal case, PW1 immediately reported the matter to the police i.e. PW7, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Dabeerpura, and the said police officer registered Crime No.92/2001 only under Section 174 Cr.P.C. If really the said harassment is in existence as on the date of the report, the same would have been mentioned in the report. It is not known as to why PW1 has not stated all these facts in his report marked as Ex.P1. (7) In Ex.Pl, what was stated is about the marriage and the disputes between the wife and husband i.e., the deceased and the accused and about the death of the deceased on account of the disputes. In my considered view, at the first instance, they should state all the required details in the first information report. Of course, the first information report is not an encyclopedia to contain all the contentions. But, the basic requirements shall be there in the said report. No doubt, it is true that a young woman died within a span of four years from the date of marriage. Of course, the first information report is not an encyclopedia to contain all the contentions. But, the basic requirements shall be there in the said report. No doubt, it is true that a young woman died within a span of four years from the date of marriage. But however, as there is no evidence that it is an unnatural death and there is harassment for dowry soon before her death, this Court is of the view that the accused cannot be said to have committed the offence falling under Section 304-B IPC for the reason that he is the husband of the deceased. (8) Coming to the evidence falling under Section 12(1)(b) of the Act, every applicant, who makes an application for passport, is expected to give the correct details. If an applicant gives false information only with a view to get passport, then only it becomes an offence falling under Section 12(1)(b) of the Act. It may be apt to refer to the said provision of law. "12. Offences and Penalties :- 1(b) Whoever, knowingly furnishes any false information or suppresses any material information with a view to obtaining a passport or travel document under this Act or without lawful authority alters or attempts or alter or causes to alter the entries made in a passport or travel document, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees or with both." The words used in the said provision of law clearly indicate about false information or suppression of any information with a view to obtain a passport. Here is a case where it can definitely be said that the accused had furnished false information, since as on the date when he submitted an application for passport, he was married and completed his medicine and was prosecuting further studies in post graduation. In the application he furnished his educational qualification as "S.S.C. and Intermediate". In my considered view, the said false information or suppression of material information is not with a view to obtaining passport. Whether the educational qualification of the accused is Intermediate or whether he is married or not, makes no difference for the passport authorities to issue passport. (9) Here, this Court gives an example. In my considered view, the said false information or suppression of material information is not with a view to obtaining passport. Whether the educational qualification of the accused is Intermediate or whether he is married or not, makes no difference for the passport authorities to issue passport. (9) Here, this Court gives an example. If a person is convicted, in the normal circumstances, the passport authorities will refuse to issue a passport to him, and in that connection there is a column in the application and in that column, if he furnishes false information knowingly stating that he was never arrested or convicted, the passport authorities, taking the same into consideration, refuse to issue passport to him and the said act falls under Section 12(1)(b) of the Act i.e., knowingly furnishing false information or suppression of any material information. (10) As stated supra, whether the information about the marital status or educational qualification of the accused in no way differ the situation. Further, during the course of his 313 Cr.P.C. examination, the accused has stated that he approached a broker and simply signed the documents and the details in the said application form have been filled in by the broker. No doubt, the said act of approaching the broker and filling the application is not expected to and it may attract a different provision of law, but not the provision i.e. Section 12(1)(b) of the Act. In the light of the above discussion, this Court is of the view that the Court below erred in coming to the conclusion that the accused is guilty of the offence falling under Section 304-B IPC and Section 12(1)(b) of the Act. (11) In the result, the criminal appeal is allowed and the conviction and sentence imposed against the appellant/accused by the learned I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, in SC No.167 of 2005, by judgment dated 25/10/2007, are set aside, and consequently, the appellant/accused is acquitted of the charges levelled against him. The fine amount, if any, paid by the appellant/accused shall be refunded to him.