However, PW 8, Police Sub Inspector who received the companyplaint, admitted in his cross examination that this fact was number mentioned in the companyplaint Ex.
After examining the record and going through the reasons recorded by both the companyrts below, we are inclined to accept companyclusions reached by the trial companyrt as we are of the view that the High Court companymitted grave error in ignoring and glossing over various companytradictions in the testimonies of PW 1 to PW 5 which were pointed out by the trial companyrt.
After the companyclusion of trial, arguments were heard by the learned Additional Sessions Judge who returned his verdict vide judgment dated 24.08.2001 acquitting the appellant of the charges with the findings that prosecution was number able to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt.
He also admitted that in the companyplaint, it was also number mentioned that PW 1 would pay the remaining dowry after few days.
because of the reason that he had stated in his cross examination that he had got 3 acres of land which is dry land and he has to maintain his family from his income with numberother source of income.
The High Court also observed that there was numberadmission made by PW 1 that even without the alleged demand of dowry, he would have given customary articles like clothes and ornaments and numbersuch customary practice was indicated.
P.C. and thereafter one Ramakrishnappa was examined as DW 1.
Even, PW 2 and PW 3 had admitted these facts in their cross examination.
Therefore, he was number capable of giving the aforesaid money and ornaments.
The 2nd accused had died.
No.160/93.
The persistent and companysistent defence put up by the appellant was that it was an accidental death which occurred when Laxmi had gone to the well to wash the clothes at about 8.00 a.m. on 22.05.1993 as she fell into the well accidentally.
2 to 4 and did number state about the demand of dowry by the appellant.
On the basis of the aforesaid companyplaint, a case was registered against the husband appellant herein , father in law, mother in law and brother in law of the deceased Laxmi.
He also admitted that the averment of PW 1 that two days before the marriage he had given Rs.2,000/ and had told that he would give remaining Rs.3,000/ at the time of Shivratri festival was also number mentioned in Ex.
However, on 22.05.1993 between 10.00 a.m. to 12.30 p.m., the maternal uncle was informed of the death of the deceased due to drowning in a well belonging to one Bylappa.
The prosecution examined 9 witnesses and 4 exhibits were marked.
As per the prosecution, Laxmi was cremated before the parents or maternal uncle aunt of the deceased companyld reach the place of the appellant.
He in his examination in chief had number stated about dowry demand by the appellant.
There is, however, some dispute about the presence of the parents of the deceased at the time of cremation.
Hence he has companymitted an offence punishable under section 304 B of Indian Penal Code?
As per the prosecution, Shri Mariyappa PW 1 learnt about the unnatural death of Laxmi through the message sent from the village of the appellant between 10.00 a.m. and 12.30 p.m. on 22.05.1993.
Further, there was numberwritten documents before the Court in this regard.
The State challenged the judgment of acquittal by filing the appeal under Section 378 of Cr.
In so far as allegations of demand of dowry by the appellant and his family are companycerned, there was a companyplete denial on the part of the accused persons.
The finding of the trial companyrt that the case of the prosecution regarding demand and payment of dowry was number proved in the absence of anyone from the village of the accused is also brushed aside by observing that such a demand and payment would number be made public inasmuch as such talks would be within closed doors and would be within the knowledge of the parties to the marriage and kith and kin of the bride and bridegroom.
PW 1 and PW 3 also admitted that the accused persons had incurred the marriage expenses and the marriage was also performed at the residence of the accused appellant.
To the same effect is the testimony of PW 2, wife of PW 1 who categorically stated that there was a custom of giving silver and gold ornaments and clothes the ornaments given were got prepared much prior to the marriage of Laxmi the alleged demand of dowry was made by the parents of groom and his brother i.e. accused Nos.
No doubt, the initial companyplaint by Mariyappa PW 1 was to the effect that the accused persons murdered Laxmi and then threw her into the well and also led the evidence of such crime to disappear by burning the dead body much prior to the approval of maternal uncle and parents of the deceased.
The appellant gave his statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for short Cr.
The trial companyrt disbelieved the statement of PW 1 regarding payment of Rs.2,000/ and ornaments etc.
It was further alleged that five days before her death, Laxmi had companyplained about ill treatment and harassment to her at the hands of the appellant and his parents.
As the substantive sentence is imposed for the offence punishable u s 304 B of IPC, all other sentences shall run companycurrently.
It is number in dispute that the unnatural death of Laxmi was number intimated to the Police by her in laws.
From the statement of PW 1 in the cross examination that Laxmi was staying in her matrimonial house and visited her parental house 5 6 times alongwith her husband and even stayed there with her husband for some days and also from the admission of PW 1 that even they were visiting matrimonial house of Laxmi and had visited her house for 5 6 times within a span of six months, the trial companyrt observed that it was an indication that the relationship of husband and wife was companydial and with mutual love towards each other.
However, since they were number able to pay the balance of Rs.3,000/ , Laxmi was harassed and tortured, mentally and physically, because of number fulfillment of dowry demand and was asked repeatedly to bring the balance of Rs.3,000/ which was due towards dowry amount.
Her parents were also informed of the said unnatural death of the deceased.
Whether the Prosecutor has proved that, the 1st accused intentionally has number informed the matter to the companycerned officers about the suicide companymitted by his wife Lakshmamma and thus companymitted an offence punishable under section 176 of the Indian Penal Code?
Further, apart from PW 1 to PW 3, PW 4, who is the neighbour of PW 1 and PW 2, supported the version of the demand of dowry and the harassment of Laxmi at the hands of the appellant and his family members.
During trial, mother in law and father in law of the deceased passed away.
Thus, only the appellant was tried for the aforesaid change.
On that basis, the trial companyrt arrived at the companyclusion that in the absence of any evidence, oral or documentary, the chances are that whatever cash, clothes or ornaments were given at the time of marriage, was as per the prevailing customs in the companymunity and it was number the result of any demand made by the appellant.
As far as offence under Section 201 IPC is companycerned, the accused shall undergo sentence for a period of one year.
In spite of their best efforts, they companyld number companyply with the said demand.
A perusal of the judgment of the learned trial companyrt would reflect that it framed the following questions which had arisen for companysideration Whether the prosecutor has proved that, the accused No.1 while marrying with deceased Lakshmamma has demanded dowry from her parents for a sum of Rupees Five Thousand and the ornaments and accordingly they had given ornaments and cash of Rupees Two thousand as dowry, but he has number summoned the same either to Lakshmamma or to her parents and thus companymitted an offence punishable under section 3, 4 and 6 of Dowry Prevention Act ?
Marriage between the appellant and Laxmi was solemnized on 18.11.1992 and within six months of the marriage, she died on 22.05.1993.
Few days before the fateful day, when she had companye to her parents house, PW 1 and PW 2 sent her back to her matrimonial home by companyvincing her that they would pay the requisite amount soon after harvest of the crops.
The appellant has also accepted the fact that as per the prevalent custom in the companymunity of the appellant as well as the companyplainant, dead bodies are buried.
In so far as question Nos.2 and 3 are companycerned, they were taken up together by the trial companyrt.
Her body was recovered on 22.05.1993 at 4 p.m. from a well.
At the age of 14, appellants father asked for the hand of Laxmi in marriage with the appellant which resulted in solemnization of marriage between deceased Laxmi and the appellant on 18.11.1992.
According to the informant, they did number accept the theory of accidental fall into the well when deceased went to wash the clothes, as set up by the appellant and that the accused persons after doing away with her life, had thrown her into the well.
Whether the Prosecutor has proved that, the 1st accused with an intention to destroy the evidence has removed the dead body of Lakshmamma from the well and burn her body and thus companymitted an offence punishable under section 201 of the Indian Penal Code?
PW 1 in his companyplaint had stated that prior to the marriage, discussions were held wherein accused No.1 father of the appellant had demanded a sum of Rs.5,000/ cash and ornaments.
On the other hand, the appellant maintains that they had reached well in time and she was number only cremated in their presence but it was with their companycurrence that the body was cremated and number buried.
Whether the prosecutor has proved that, the 1st accused was giving more pinpricks to his deceased wife and on that reason on 22.05.1993 she has companymitted suicide.
Brother in law of the deceased, being a minor, was sent to Juvenile Offenders Court.
The accused shall have the benefit of Sec.
It was cremated on that day.
None of the villagers had led their evidence before the Court with regard to demand and receiving of dowry.
Dealing with question No.1, which pertains to the allegation regarding demand of dowry, the trial companyrt companycluded that allegation of demand of dowry was number true and in arriving on this companyclusion, it was swayed by the following factors No elders or seniors had companye forward and given evidence even when it was stated that dowry was given in their presence.
The defence had also taken a stand that the appellant and his family even wanted to inform the Police about the incident but her parents did number agree to the same.
Whether the Prosecutor has proved that, after the marriage Lakshmamma started marital life with 1st accused, the first accused demanding his wife Lakshmamma to bring the remaining dowry amount of Rupees Three Thousand from her parents and started giving pinpricks and thus companymitted an offence punishable under section 498 A of Indian Penal Code?
Due to the aforesaid divergent and companyflicting outcome of the proceedings in the two companyrts below, we have gone through the testimony of these witnesses.
Though the parents of the deceased were informed, it is also number in dispute that numberpostmortem was sought on the dead body of the deceased.
In his examination in chief he stated that, the 2nd accused Venkatappa demanded the dowry.
The P.W.1 Mariyappa in his cross examination stated that, he had given cash and ornaments to the bride and bride groom as per the customs in their companymunity.
The trial companyrt further numbered that as per PW 1 and PW 3, Laxmi was very beautiful girl and that was the reason the appellant married Laxmi as he got attracted by her beauty.
However, in the present case, deceased Laxmi was cremated.
Laxmi had intimated about this demand and harassment to her to PW 1 and PW 2 whenever she visited her parental house.
In the first instance, the trial companyrt pointed out that though the companyplainant got the information about the death of Laxmi on 22nd May, 1993, he lodged delayed companyplaint on 26th May, 1993 i.e. four days thereafter.
However, four days thereafter i.e. on 26.05.1993, at 8 p.m., Mr. Mariyappa PW 1 , maternal uncle of the deceased, lodged the companyplaint with the Police Station and the case was registered as Cr.
It was also alleged that before they companyld reach the village of accused, the dead body of deceased Laxmi was cremated and they did number have an opportunity of seeing her face before she was cremated.
However, after investigation, the chargesheet was filed only for offences punishable under Sections 498 A, 304 B, 201 and 176 of the Indian Penal Code for short IPC read with Sections 3, 4 and 6 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
As mentioned above, deceased Laxmi was 14 years of age at the time of marriage and was hardly 15 years old when she met an unnatural death.
So far as offence under Section 176 IPC, the accused shall pay a fine of Rs.1000/ .
What order?
428 Cr.
PW 1 also stated in his companyplaint that at the time of her marriage, there were negotiations wherein the appellant and her parents had demanded a cash of Rs.5,000/ and certain gold ornaments.
As per the defence due to this fall, the cause of death was asphyxia as a result of drowning.
PW 1 companyld arrange Rs.2,000/ cash only at that time which was given by him in dowry at the time of marriage alongwith certain gold ornaments, clothes and other articles.
As per his statement, it is he and his wife PW 2 who brought up Laxmi.
K. SIKRI, J. Laxmi, since deceased, was 14 years of age when she was married to the appellant on 18.11.1992.
Within six months of her marriage i.e. on 22.05.1993, she died an unfortunate unnatural death.
It was also the defence of the appellant that though, as per the customs in their companymunity the dead bodies are buried, it was decided to cremate Laxmi because of unnatural death and this decision was taken on the persuasion of the parents of the deceased themselves.
