This appeal by special leave has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment and order of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore dated 16th April, 1999 whereby the appellant has been found guilty of the offences under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code I.P.C. and Sections 3, 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
while A 1 preferred Criminal Appeal No.125 of 1995 against his companyviction for the offence under Section 498A IPC.
Sub durral heamotoma measuring 2 x 1 on the right frontal area of brain.
However the autopsy on the dead body of the deceased revealed the following injuries Five irregular companytusion injuries present on the left shoulder, each measuring 1 1/2 cm x 2 cm.
In the morning they found her dead body near a river.
The sentences have been directed to run companycurrently.
3 Heamotoma measuring 1 x 2 on the right frontal area present.
Both A 1 and A 2 preferred a special leave petition before this Court, but the special leave petition in so far as it related to A 1 was dismissed at the admission stage itself.
Contusion injury measuring 3 x 2 on the right hypothdrine region.
The son of the appellant was accused No.1 hereinafter referred to as A 1 while his wife was accused No.3 hereinafter referred to as A 3 .
Haemoragic area found on the lower part of anterior part of liver.
On 4.10.1990 her dead body was found near a river.
The State of Karnataka preferred Criminal Appeal No.868 of 1995 against the acquittal of the three accused persons of the charges under Sections 302, 201 etc.
Intra companyebral heamorrage on the right frontal lobe.
As numbericed earlier, A 1 the son, A 2 appellant and A 3 the wife of the appellant were put up for trial before the Sessions Court.
The appellant and A 3 were acquitted of all the charges levelled against them.
They 2 were charged under Sections 302/34, 201, 203, 498A and 304B, I.P.C. as also under Sections 3, 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
The States appeal as against A 3 was dismissed by the High Court, and the appeal against acquittal of A 1 on other charges was also dismissed.
The next morning at about 10.00 A.M. A 1 lodged a report at the police station to the effect that on the earlier night the deceased had gone out of the house to clean utencils but did number return, and since it was raining, the search did number yield any result.
By its judgment and order dated 14th February, 1995 the Trial Court found A 1 guilty of the offence under Section 498A, I.P.C. but acquitted him of all other charges.
The brief facts of the case may be numbericed The appellant along with his wife and son was put up for trial before the Sessions Judge, Chikamagalur.
The case of the prosecution is that A 1 was married to the deceased on 27.5.1990.
He has been sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment on each companynt and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/ under the Dowry Prohibition Act.
On the basis of the report lodged by A 1, the police ought to have swung into action, but it appears from the judgments of the Courts below that the police did number act with promptitude as a result of which much of the evidence was lost.
Both the appeals were heard together and were disposed of by a companymon judgment Only the appellant A 2 has impugned the judgment of the High Court companyvicting him for offences punishable under Section 498A IPC and Sections 3, 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
