Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1130 (KAR)

State of Karnataka v. Arun Ganapati Naik

2019-06-06

BELLUNKE A.S.

body2019
JUDGMENT : Bellunke A.S., J. This appeal is preferred by the State against the judgment of acquittal passed in S.C.No.64/2011 on the file of Principal District and Sessions Judge, U.K. Karwar, dated 08.07.2017. 2. Brief facts of this case are that the complainant Shashikala was married to accused. They led marital life for some time. Thereafter the accused contracted second marriage. The allegation of the complainant is that after second marriage, accused started quarreling with her. Since from ten years from the date of incident, the complainant was residing separately. The accused was coming to the house of complainant and he was insisting the complainant for money. On the date of incident, i.e., on 26.07.2010 at about 8.30 p.m., the accused came to the house of the complainant and demanded money. When she refused to give money and she told him that if he continues torturing, she will die. The accused also told her to die so that he can live happily with his second wife. Therefore, on account of the act of the accused, the complainant poured kerosene on herself and set her ablaze. Therefore, she sustained burn injuries. The injured was taken to hospital for treatment. On 27.12.2010, the statement of the complainant was recorded by the police at 00.10 hours in the Government Hospital at Bhatkal. On that basis, Crime No.177/2010 was registered against the accused. The Investigating Officer conducted the investigation and filed charge sheet against the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 of IPC. 3. After committal, charge for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 of IPC was framed. Learned Sessions Judge held trial of the case and found that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond any reasonable doubt. Consequently, it resulted in acquittal of the accused. The said judgment has been challenged by the State on many grounds. 4. I have heard learned H.C.G.P. for the State and learned counsel for the accused at length. Perused the material available on record. 5. The main document i.e., copy of statement given by the deceased before the Investigating Officer and in the presence of doctor is made available to the Court. On going through the same and the judgment, I find that the learned Judge has meticulously gone through the evidence of each and every witness. Perused the material available on record. 5. The main document i.e., copy of statement given by the deceased before the Investigating Officer and in the presence of doctor is made available to the Court. On going through the same and the judgment, I find that the learned Judge has meticulously gone through the evidence of each and every witness. After hearing at length, this Court entailed a doubt as to whether there is any merit in the appeal so as to admit and call for records. Therefore, the following point would arise for consideration: (1) "Whether the appellant/State has made out any ground for admission of this appeal? (2) What order?" 6. Since the entire appeal is heard on merits with records, I directly proceed to examine whether the ingredients of Sections 498-A and 306 of IPC are made out by the prosecution. 7. It is undisputed that the accused and the deceased were married long back. After leading life for some years, the accused went for second marriage and started to reside separately. After the second marriage of accused, the complainant was residing near the house of her mother. The statement of the deceased recorded in the hospital on 27.12.2010 would go to show that the deceased complainant and her husband were residing separately for over a period of ten years. The only allegation is that the accused used to come to the house of complainant occasionally and used to harass her for money as she had no children. It appears from the facts and circumstances of the case that the accused undertaken second marriage on account of not begetting any children by the deceased. Husband demanding the money, abusing or beating on few occasions and for over a period of ten years the said life is said to have been spent separately by both of them, I find these type of allegations cannot be said to be sufficient to hold that there was any willful cruelty caused to the deceased. 8. As regards, specific incident is concerned on that day, the accused started quarreling with his wife and demanding money. Then the complainant threatened that if he gives such type of harassment, she will commit suicide. Then the accused told her to die so that he can live happily with his second wife and went away from there. 8. As regards, specific incident is concerned on that day, the accused started quarreling with his wife and demanding money. Then the complainant threatened that if he gives such type of harassment, she will commit suicide. Then the accused told her to die so that he can live happily with his second wife and went away from there. Thereafter at 8.30 p.m., the deceased said to have set herself ablaze and sustained burn injuries. Even the statement at Ex.P-1 is admitted as it is, I find that the ingredients of Section 306 of IPC cannot be said to have been made out. Moreover, the trial Court has also expressed doubt about the genuineness of this document. It is a statement recorded by the Investigating Officer. As regards corroboration is concerned, the material witness have not supported the case of the prosecution i.e., mother of the deceased do not know as to whether why her daughter committed suicide. She has also not deposed with regard to causing of cruelty to her daughter by the accused as alleged in the complaint. 9. There is also contradiction in the evidence of doctor as he has stated in his evidence that the complainant was in a position to talk when her statement at Ex.P-1 was recorded but PW-6 has stated in his evidence that the complainant was not in a position to speak when he went to see her in hospital. Moreover, there is no endorsement by the doctor with regard the condition of the complainant as to whether she was in a fit state of mind to give statement and the Investigating Officer was being permitted by the doctor concerned to record the statement of the complainant. There is no consistent and corroborative material on record to prove the guilt of the accused beyond any reasonable doubt. 10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajbabu and another v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2008) 17 SCC 526 has held that unless there is direct evidence to show that the accused was aiding or instigating the deceased to commit suicide, or entered into conspiracy to aid her in committing suicide, the accused cannot be convicted for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC. Another judgment rendered in Criminal Appeal No.790 of 2017 can also be relied on. Another judgment rendered in Criminal Appeal No.790 of 2017 can also be relied on. In the said judgment, the ingredients required to apply presumption under Section 113 of IPC is also elaborately discussed. In the instant case, the prosecution neither established the cruelty caused by the accused to the complainant nor proved the abetment to commit suicide. 11. The husband and wife were separated quite long back i.e., more than ten years. There is no corroborative evidence with regard to cruelty as alleged in the complaint. No specific incident that happened even after spending ten years separated life is forthcoming from the evidence on record which resulted in the complainant committing suicide. Therefore, I find that there are no grounds to admit this appeal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed at the admission stage itself. 12. Send a copy of this judgment to the trial Court.