HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.283 OF 2010
JUDGMENT:
This Criminal Appeal is filed by the Appellant/Accused aggrieved by the conviction recorded by the III Additional Sessions Judge, FAC: I additional Sessions Judge, Karimnagar, in S.C.No.543 of 2008 dt.11.02.2010, convicting the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A of the Indian Penal code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and sentence of Rigorous Imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs.2,000/- for the offence under Section 498-A of IPC; sentence of Rigorous Imprisonment for 5 years and a fine of Rs.15,000/- for the offence under Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act; sentence of Rigorous Imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. Heard and perused the record.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the marriage of appellant with the deceased was performed on 08.12.2004 and at the time of marriage, dowry of Rs.2.4 lakhs was given. They lived happily for two or three months. In the year 2006, they were blessed with a daughter. For the reason of giving birth to a female child, 2 according to PW1 and PW2, additional dowry of Rs.2 laksh was made by the appellant. On 12.09.2007, the deceased poured Kerosene on herself and lit fire. While undergoing treatment, she died on 18.09.2007. On 19.09.2007, Ex.P1 complaint was filed by the father of the deceased alleging that dowry was given and also the appellant started harassing the deceased physically and mentally for additional dowry of Rs.2 lakhs.
4. On the basis of the complaint filed on 19.09.2007, one day after the death of the deceased, the police investigated the case and filed charge sheet against the appellant under Sections 498-A and 304-B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
5. The learned Sessions Judge acquitted the appellant for the offence under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal code and convicted for the offences punishable under Section 498-A of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
6. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that when the appellant was acquitted for the offence under Section 304-B of IPC, the consequence shall be an acquittal under Section 498-A, since the Court did not believe the harassment for dowry for which reason, he was acquitted under Section 304-B. 3
7. On the other hand learned Additional Public Prosecutor Sri S.Sudershan submits that there is ample evidence to suggest that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and dowry was also taken, for which reason the conviction has to be maintained.
8. On perusal of record, a complaint was made on 19.09.2007, though the incident took place on 12.09.2007. In the said complaint, except making a bald statement that the deceased was harassed physically and mentally for additional dowry for Rs.2 lakhs, no specific incidents or dates are narrated. Even during the course of trial, except making bald statements that the deceased was harassed for Rs.2 lakhs, after giving birth to a female child, no other specific details are given.
9. As seen from the Dying Declaration which was recorded by the Magistrate on 14.09.2007, the deceased stated as follows;
"Q. For what purpose the quarrel was occurred. I asked to take baby to the hospital as she is feeling unwell, but he opposed. Later, I expressed that I die and he opposed and slept. At 10.00 p.m. I entered into kitchen and he asked me why you are going? I replied that I prepare tea for me and I poured kerosene on me and lit fire."4
10. The version of the deceased was that though the baby was feeling unwell, since the appellant did not heed to her request to take the child to the hospital and though the deceased expressed that she would die, the appellant slept, for which reason, the deceased entered into the kitchen at 10.00 p.m. and poured Kerosene herself and set fire.
11. The narration of the deceased would clearly indicate that she was hyper sensitive to the situation which happened on a daily basis in normal households. Though, requested to take the child to the hospital at 10.00 p.m., the appellant sleeping, would not in any manner suggest any kind of harassment that was meted out to the deceased. Not a whisper in dying declaration about any demand or any kind of cruelty that was meted out to the deceased.
12. The close relatives of a deceased person tend to exaggerate and make embellishments regarding the marital life in given situations of a daughter committing suicide. Apparently, the emotions ran high and witnesses tend to make false allegations. Even, in such situation, the only allegation made against the appellant is a vague and bald allegation regarding demand of Rs.2 lakhs as additional dowry. In the background of the statement 5 made by the deceased during her examination by Magistrate on 14.09.2007 and the witnesses making a bald allegation regarding making of demand for additional dowry of Rs.2 lakhs without giving any details, relying on such evidence would be improper and such vague allegations do not prove a case beyond reasonable doubt against the accused which is required to base a conviction in a criminal case.
13. For the said reasons, the conviction recorded by the learned Sessions Judge is, hereby, set aside and the appellant is acquitted.
14. Accordingly, the conviction under Section 498-A of IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, is set aside and the appeal is allowed. Since the appellant is on bail, his bail bonds shall stand cancelled.
Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand dismissed.
__________________ K.SURENDER, J Dt.:16.11.2022 tk 6 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 283 OF 2010 Dt. 16.11.2022 tk