Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 965 (MAD)

Saravanan v. State

2020-07-06

T.RAVINDRAN

body2020
JUDGMENT : T. Ravindran, J. 1. The District Sessions Judge, Manila Court, Cuddalore District, by judgment dated 02.02.2013 passed in S.C. No. 253 of 2011, has convicted the appellant/A1 under Section 498-A, IPC and sentenced him to undergo Rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months and under Section 304-B, IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and directed the sentences of imprisonment imposed on the appellant/A1 to run concurrently and acquitted the second accused Santha, the mother of the appellant/A1 of the offences put forth against her under Sections 498-A and 304-B, IPC and challenging the conviction and sentenced imposed on him, the present appeal has been preferred by the appellant/A1. 2. Shorn of unnecessary details, according to the prosecution, the first accused and the deceased Nithya got married three years prior to the occurrence and at the time of marriage, the deceased parents had presented 20 sovereigns of jewels and also other household articles as dowry and also promised to purchase a motorcycle for the appellant/A1 6 months after the marriage and thereafter, the appellant and the deceased were living separately, however, the appellant used to insist the deceased to apprise her parents to purchase the motorcycle as promised by them and on that score, ill-treated and torture her persistently and the deceased in turn had been requesting her parents to purchase the motorcycle as demanded by the appellant/A1 and in continuation of his persistent demands, it is put forth that on 27.04.2011 when the deceased brother Aananthan (PW 3) had been to visit the deceased, the appellant and his mother had directed him to purchase the motorcycle and further it is also stated that on 28.04.2011 at 9.00 a.m. the deceased contacted her father Mani (PW 1) over phone and informed him that the accused had been ill-treating and torturing her with reference to purchase of the motorcycle and accordingly, the prosecution has put forth the case that unable to bear the torture and ill-treatment caused to her, the deceased on 28.04.2011 at about 9 p.m. committed suicide by hanging from a fan and thereby died and thus it is alleged that the accused had committed the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 304-B, IPC. 3. To sustain the prosecution case, PWs 1 to 14 were examined and Exs. 3. To sustain the prosecution case, PWs 1 to 14 were examined and Exs. P1 to P12 were marked. MOs 1 to 3 were also marked. On the conclusion of the prosecution evidence, the accused were examined under Section 313, Cr.P.C. qua the incriminating evidence tendered against them by the prosecution witnesses and the accused had denied the same. According to the accused, they had not committed the offences put forth against them and not ill-treated and tortured the deceased with reference to the purchase of motorcycle and according to them, the deceased was depressed by the fact that her husband viz. Saravanan the appellant/A1 had not obtained any employment in the Government and also unable to bear the fact that she and her husband viz., the appellant/A1 were unable to pay the premium amount towards the LIC coverage of their child and consequently, committed suicide and it is also put forth that the appellant/A1 is possessed of a motorcycle and therefore, there is no question of the accused demanding the purchase of motorcycle from the deceased or her parents and therefore, it is stated that the case had been falsely foisted against them. In support of the defence version, no oral evidence has been adduced. Exhibits D1 to 4 has been marked. No Mo has been marked. 4. On an appreciation of the materials placed on record, both oral and documentary, the trial Court was pleased to convict and sentence the appellant/A 1 for the offences under Sections 498-A and 304-B as afore-stated and acquitted his mother viz., A2 of the offences put forth against her. Challenging the same, the appeal has been preferred by the appellant/A1. 5. The criminal law in the matter has been set in motion based on the complaint lodged by the father of the deceased viz., Mani, who has been examined as PW 1. The complaint lodged by him has been marked as Ex. P1. Ex. P1 is dated 29.04.2011. The deceased is found to have committed suicide on the night of 28.04.2011 by hanging from a fan. The complaint lodged by him has been marked as Ex. P1. Ex. P1 is dated 29.04.2011. The deceased is found to have committed suicide on the night of 28.04.2011 by hanging from a fan. On a perusal of the complaint lodged by PW 1, it is seen that the complainant has given a detailed version of the dowry provided to the appellant/A1 and at the time of marriage, the assurance has been given by him that he would purchase the motorcycle to the appellant/A1 6 months after the marriage and also stressed that the appellant right from the inception of the marriage had been insisting the deceased to persuade her parents to purchase the motorcycle for him and on that score, causing ill-treatment and cruelty to the deceased and it is also alleged that the appellant/A 1 had been ill-treating the deceased even in the presence of PW 1, when he visited her, on account of the delay in the purchase of motorcycle and it is also alleged that the deceased had contacted PW 1, the father of the deceased over phone and apprised him of the ill-treatment caused to her by the appellant/A1 as well as his mother qua the purchase of the motorcycle and thus it is found that the complainant viz., PW. 1 has given a detailed account of the ill-treatment and torture caused to the deceased by the appellant/A1. PW 1 during the course of his evidence has also stressed upon the facts averred by him in the complaint and clearly averred that the appellant/A1 and his mother viz., A2 had been persisting the deceased to insist upon her parents to purchase the motorcycle and on that score inflicting cruelty and ill- treatment towards her and the same has also been spoken to by the deceased mother Parvathy examined as PW 2 and the deceased brother Aanandhan examined as PW 3. Considering the evidence of PWs 1 to 3 in toto, it is found that the appellant/A1 had been insisting the deceased to prevail upon her parents to purchase the motorcycle in connection with the marriage and thus, it is found that the deceased had been subjected to cruelty and ill-treatment at the hands of the appellant/A1 in particular and accordingly, it is found that prior to the date of occurrence, when PW 3, the brother of the deceased had been to visit the deceased, he was also called upon to purchase the motorcycle immediately and on the date of occurrence at 9 a.m. it is further noted that the deceased had contacted her father PW 1 over phone and apprised him of the ill-treatment and cruelty caused to her by her husband viz., the appellant/A1 qua the purchase of the motorcycle and thus, it is found that the prosecution through the evidence of PWs 1 to 3, in toto, had established the cruelty and ill- treatment inflicted upon the deceased by the appellant/A 1 in particular. 6. Insofar as this case is concerned, as could be seen from the materials placed by the prosecution, it is found that the accused on his own volition had appeared before the Village Administrative Officer Mathiyazhagan examined as PW 9 and tendered a confession of the crime committed by him and the confession tendered by the appellant/A1 before PW 9 has been marked as Ex. P4 and based on Ex. P4, PW 9 has prepared a special report marked as Ex. P5 and it is found that it is only PW 9, who had produced the appellant/A1 before the police and thereupon, the appellant/A1 had been arrested by the police. Considering the abovesaid facts, particularly the confession tendered by the appellant/A1 before PW 9 Mathiyazhagan, the VAO marked as Ex. P4, PW 9 has prepared a special report marked as Ex. P5 and it is found that it is only PW 9, who had produced the appellant/A1 before the police and thereupon, the appellant/A1 had been arrested by the police. Considering the abovesaid facts, particularly the confession tendered by the appellant/A1 before PW 9 Mathiyazhagan, the VAO marked as Ex. P5, as rightly held by the trial Court, the appellant/A1 has clearly confessed to the crime before the VAO particularly about the ill-treatment caused to the deceased towards the purchase of the motorcycle and the attack inflicted by him upon the deceased with the wooden log on the date of occurrence by driving her out of the house and chasing her in the street and apprehending danger to her life, the deceased had escaped from his clutchers and run to the neighbour's house for safety and thus it is found that when the appellant/A1 himself had admitted to the crime put forth against him before the VAO by way of extra judicial confession and when PW 9 Mthiyazhagan, the VAO, has tendered clear evidence on the above aspects and despite the cross examination, nothing has been culled out from PW 9 to discredit his evidence with reference to the same, and considering the evidence of PW 9 and the confession tendered by the appellant/A1 before him marked as Ex. P4, on a conjoint reading of the abovesaid materials projected by the prosecution, it is found that the appellant/AI had been persistently and continuously demanding the deceased to prevail upon her parents to purchase the motorcycle and on that score, been ill-treating and torturing her and in particular, on the date of occurrence, the appellant/A1 has beaten the deceased with the wooden log by driving her out of the house and chasing her in the street and the deceased was forced to run to the neighbour's house for her safety and therefore, when the materials projected on the part of the prosecution are sufficient for upholding the crime attributed against the appellant/A1, in such view of the matter, the argument put forth by the appellant's counsel that there is no direct evidence on the part of the prosecution with reference to the attack and beating inflicted upon the deceased by the accused/A1 on the date of the occurrence, as such, cannot be countenanced. No doubt, there is no direct evidence with reference to the abovesaid aspect on the part of the prosecution. The witness examined with reference to the same namely Padmanabhan PW 5, though had turned hostile, however, considering his evidence in toto, it is found that the deceased had been subjected to attack by the appellant/A1 on the fateful day and it is noted that the deceased was forced to run to the neighbour's house for her safety and it is also further seen that PW 5, had prevailed upon the appellant/A1 not to inflict cruelty and assault on the deceased and on a close and conjoint reading of the evidence tendered by PW 5, it is seen that the deceased had been subjected to attack by the appellant/A1 on the fateful day. 7. Insofar as this case is concerned, according to the prosecution case, the inquest was conducted by the RDO Indhumathi examined as PW 10 and the inquest report prepared by her has been marked as Ex. P8. PW 10 Indhumathi, RDO has during the course of inquest examined the deceased parents, the deceased brothers as well as the accused and the father of the appellant/A1 and also the Panchayatars and opined that the deceased had been put to depression on account of her husband not being employed in the Government service and also on account of her husband attacking and beating her in the street to the gaze of the public and also the ill-treatment caused to her by her husband on account of the non-purchase of the motor cycle by her parents and accordingly, it is found that the RDO had directed the police to conduct further investigation in the matter and proceeded further. As above noted, during the inquest, the RDO has examined both the accused involved in the matter as well his father and considering the statement offered by the appellant/A1 before the RDO as found in Ex. As above noted, during the inquest, the RDO has examined both the accused involved in the matter as well his father and considering the statement offered by the appellant/A1 before the RDO as found in Ex. P8, it is seen that the appellant/A1 had admitted having demanded the deceased and her parents to provide him a motorcycle at the time of marriage and it is also noted that the deceased parents had been assuring that they would purchase the motorcycle within a reasonable time after the marriage, however inasmuch as they were unable to purchase the motorcycle, it is noted that the appellant/A1 had admitted before the RDO that he had been insisting the deceased to prevail upon her parents to purchase the motorcycle and even his parents had been insisting upon the deceased parents to purchase the motorcycle and the deceased parents used to assure them that they would purchase the motorcycle at the earliest and further, it is also seen that the appellant/A1 has admitted before the RDO that he had beaten the deceased with the wooden log on the date of occurrence, however, he would give a different version for the said attack inflicted upon the deceased and on the other hand, when the materials projected by the prosecution are viewed in toto, particularly, the confession tendered by the appellant/A1 before the VAO marked as Ex. P4 as well as the evidence of PW 5 Padmanabhan and coupled with the evidence of PWs 1 to 3 as above pointed out, it is found that the deceased had been subjected to attack and ill-treatment on the part of the appellant/A1 on the fateful day as well as right from the marriage only on account of the demand towards the purchase of the motorcycle and it is further seen that resultantly, the deceased had also complained about the same to her parents over phone and when the same had been clearly testified by PW 1 in particular and also PW 3, the brother of the deceased and also corroborated by the mother PW 2 and as above seen, when the appellant/A1 had himself voluntarily confessed to his crime before the VAO as discussed supra, in all, it is found that the trial Court is justified in holding that the prosecution has established the guilt of the appellant/A1 beyond any reasonable doubt and therefore, the contention of the appellant/A1 that there is nil evidence on the part of the prosecution with reference to the demand of dowry soon before the death of the deceased and therefore, the accused should be held not guilty of the offences levelled against him, as such, cannot be countenanced. 8. It is also put forth by the appellant's counsel that the appellant/A1 is possessed of a motorcycle and the same could be gathered from the copy of the registration certificate marked as Ex. D4 standing in the name of the appellant/A1 and therefore, according to him, the case of the prosecution that the appellant/A1 had inflicted the ill-treatment and cruelty towards the deceased towards the purchase of the motorcycle falls to the ground and therefore, conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant/A1 by the trial Court should be set aside. However, the abovesaid contention does not merit acceptance. However, the abovesaid contention does not merit acceptance. As rightly held by the trial Court, when the appellant/A1 has tendered statement before the RDO that he and his parents had been insisting the deceased parents to provide a bigger motorcycle and accordingly, the demand with reference to the same had been continuously made by the appellant/A1 and his parents and however, when the said demand had been postponed and unable to be complied with by the deceased parents one way or the other, as rightly contended by the Government Advocate, it is found that the deceased had been subjected to cruelty, attack and torture by the appellant/A1 and unable to withstand the same particularly, the same having been inflicted upon her by the appellant/A1 by assaulting her with the wooden log by chasing her in the street to the gaze of the public, it is evident that the deceased had committed suicide on account of the dowry harassment caused to her by the appellant/A1. Similarly, considering the statement tendered by A2 before the RDO particularly, when she had stated that the appellant/A1 had been persisting in his demand to purchase the motorcycle from the deceased and her parents, when the appellant's father had also tendered statement before the RDO that he had been insisting the deceased parents to purchase the motorcycle, therefore, considering the statements offered by the appellant/A1 and his parents before the RDO as well as the extra judicial confession tendered by the appellant/A1 before the VAO with reference to the continuous demand of purchase of motorcycle by him from the deceased and her parents and also the ill-treatment and torture caused to the deceased on that score, viewed cumulatively, the trial Court is justified in sustaining the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant/A1 under Section 498-A and 304-B, IPC. 9. In the light of the abovesaid factors, as rightly contended by the learned Government Advocate, the principles of law outlined in the decisions relied upon by the appellant Counsel reported in 1995 Supreme Court Cases (Cri) 817 : (AIR Online 1994 SC 221) (Rajnesh Tandon v. State of Punjab) and (2013) 15 Supreme Court Cases 269 : (2013 AIR SCW 5647) (State of Rajasthan v. Girdhari Lal) are found to be not applicable to the case at hand. In the light of the abovesaid discussions, the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant/A 1 by the trial Court under Sections 498-A and 304- B, IPC do not warrant any interference and resultantly, the criminal appeal is dismissed. The trial Court is directed to secure the presence of the appellant/A1 and commit him to prison to undergo the sentence imposed on him as per law.