Rudravva W/O. Mallappa Toravi vs Amruthgouda S/O. Chandragouda ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5782 Kant

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

      DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH, 2022

                       PRESENT

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

                         AND

         THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI

         CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100319/2017
                      C/W
         CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100034/2018


IN CRL.A NO.100319/2017

BETWEEN:

RUDRAVVA
W/O MALLAPPA TORAVI,
AGE: 45 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: BASAPUR, TALUK: NAVALGUND,
DISTRICT: DHARWAD.
                                      ...APPELLANT
(BY SHRI J.S.SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.    AMRUTHGOUDA
      S/O CHANDRAGOUDA PATIL,
      AGE: 32 YEARS,
      OCC: AGRICULTURE,
      R/O SHAYAGOTTI,
      TQ: DIST: GADAG

2.    SMT NEELAWA
      W/O CHANDRAGOUDA PATIL,
      AGE: 50 YEARS,
      OCC: AGRICULTURE,
      R/O SHAYAGOTTI,
      TQ: DIST: GADAG
                             2



3.   MALANAGOUDA
     S/O CHANDRAGOUDA PATIL,
     AGE: 25 YEARS,
     OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O SHAYAGOTTI,
     TQ: DIST: GADAG

4.    STATE OF KARNATAKA ,
      BY ITS GADAG POLICE STATION AUTHORITIES,
      REPRESENTED BY ITS
      STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
      HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
      DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD.
                                        ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI B.V.SOMAPUR, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R3
    SRI V.M. BANAKAR, ADDL.SPP FOR R4)

      THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 372
OF CR.P.C. PRAYING THAT THE ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED
31.07.2017, PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND
SESSION JUDGE GADAG IN S.C.NO.29/2014 FILED AGAINST
THE RESPONDENTS HEREIN FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTIONS 498A, 302, 304(b), 323, 504 READ WITH
SECTION 34 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE AND SECTION 3 AND
4 OF D.P.ACT, MAY KINDLY BE SET ASIDE AND THE
RESPONDENT-ACCUSED MAY BE CONVICTED AND IMPOSED
PUNISHMENT FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 498A, 302, 304(b), 323, 504 READ WITH SECTION
34 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL,
WITH COST THROUGHOUT, IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.

CRL.A. NO.100034/2018:
BETWEEN:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY THE
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
GADAG POLICE STATION,
GADAG.
                                          ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. V.M.BANAKAR, ADDL. SPP)
                            3


AND:

1.     AMRUTAGOUDA
       S/O CHANDRAGOUDA PATIL,
       AGE: 29 YEARS,
       OCC: AGRICULTURE,
       R/O SHYAGOTI,
       GADAG DISTRICT.

2.     CHANDRAGUD
       S/O RAMANAGOUDA PATIL,
       AGE: 55 YEARS,
       OCC: AGRICULTURE,
       R/O SHYAGOTI,
       GADAG DISTRICT.

3.     SMT. NEELLAVVA
       W/O CHANDRAGOUDA PATIL.
       AGE: 47 YEARS,
       OCC: AGRICULTURE,
       R/O SHYAGOTI,
       GADAG DISTRICT.

4.     MALLANAGOUDA,
       S/O CHANDRAGOUDA PATIL,
       AGE: 22 YEARS,
       OCC: AGRICULTURE,
       R/O SHYAGOTI,
       GADAG DISTRICT.

                                         ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.V.SOMAPUR, ADVOCATE FOR R1, R3 & R4;
    APPEAL AGAINST R2 DISMISSED AS ABATED
    V/O/DTD 06.09.2018)

      THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378
(1) AND (3) OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO (a) TO GRANT LEAVE TO
APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL
DATED 31.07.2017 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT &
SESSIONS JUDGE, GADAG IN SPECIAL CASE NO.29/2014; (b)
TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL
DATED 31.07.2017 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT &
SESSIONS JUDGE, GADAG IN CRIMINAL CASE NO.29/2014; (c)
CONVICT THE RESPONDENT / ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498-A 323, 302, 304(B), 504
R/W SEC 34 IPC AND SEC 3 & SEC 4 OF DP ACT.
                                        4



     THESE CRIMINAL APPEALS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 21.02.2021, COMING ON FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, J.M.KHAZI J.,
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                            JUDGMENT

These appeals are directed against the judgment and

order of acquittal dated 31.07.2017 in S.C.No.29/2014 on

the file of Prl. District & Sessions Judge, Gadag, whereby

accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 came to be acquitted for the

offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 302, 304B

read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1960

(hereinafter referred to as "IPC" for short) and Sections 3

and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (hereinafter

referred to as "DP Act" for short). The case against

accused No.2 came to be abated since he died during the

pendency of the original proceedings.

2. While Crl.A.No.100319/2017 is filed by the

mother of the deceased in her capacity as the victim under

Section 372 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

(hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C').

Crl.A.No.100034/2018 is filed by the State under Section

378(1) and (3) of Cr.P.C.

3. For the sake of convenience the parties are

referred to by their rank before the trial Court.

4. A charge sheet came to be filed against

accused Nos.1 to 4 alleging that the marriage of deceased

Shilpa and accused No.1 Amruth Gouda Patil was

performed on 16.04.2012. At the time of marriage the

accused persons demanded and received dowry in a sum

of Rs.50,000/-, two tholas of gold and household articles.

At the time of baby shower of the deceased, two tholas of

gold was given and a sum of Rs.50,000/- was received by

accused persons under the pretext of securing

employment to accused No.1. Inspite of all these, the

accused persons started harassing and ill-treating

deceased Shilpa both physically and mentally, demanding

additional cash and gold by way of dowry. For having not

met their demand, on 06.03.2014, at 5.00 a.m., accused

persons poured kerosene and set the deceased on fire.

While undergoing treatment at KIMS hospital, Hubballi,

deceased succumbed to the burn injuries on 10.03.2014 at

8.45 p.m. and thereby accused persons have committed

the offences punishable under Sections 323, 302, 304B

read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 3 of the DP Act.

5. Even before the charges were framed, accused

No.2 died and as such case against him came to be

abated.

6. Accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 have pleaded not

guilty and claimed trial.

7. In support of the prosecution case, in all 21

witnesses are examined as PWs.1 to 21, Exs.P1 to 29 and

MOs.1 to 73 are marked.

8. During the course of their statement under

Section 313 of Cr.P.C., accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 have

denied the incriminating evidence. They have not chosen

to lead defence evidence on their behalf. However, during

the course of cross-examination of prosecution witnesses,

they have got marked portion of the statement of PW-3 as

Ex.D1 and D2, PW-1 as Ex.D3 and a letter dated

07.03.2014 as Ex.D4.

9. Vide the impugned Judgment and order, the

trial Court has acquitted accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 of all the

charges on the ground that the prosecution has failed to

prove the charges levelled against them beyond

reasonable doubt.

10. We have heard elaborate arguments on behalf

of the complainant, prosecution as well as the accused

persons.

11. During the course of his arguments the learned

counsel representing complainant submitted that having

regard to the fact that the death of Shilpa had taken place

within a period of two years of the marriage in unnatural

and suspicious circumstances and inspite of there being a

presumption under Section 113A and 113B of the Indian

Evidence Act and in the light of the overwhelming

evidence placed on record, the Tribunal has erred in

acquitting the accused persons and the same is illegal, not

sustainable in law and as such liable to be set aside.

12. He would further submit that the evidence

placed on record prove the fact that at the time of

marriage and also subsequent to the marriage, accused

persons demanded and received dowry and the

prosecution has also established that the deceased was

harassed and ill-treated for the purpose of dowry, as a

result of which ultimately, deceased died due to burn

injuries, while living in the house of accused persons and

as such all the charges levelled against the accused

persons are proved beyond reasonable doubt. In view of

the presumption under Section 113A and 113B, the burden

is on the accused persons to prove their innocence. In the

absence of accused persons discharging the said burden,

the trial Court has grossly erred in acquitting the accused

persons.

13. The learned counsel representing the

complainant would further submit that throughout the

accused persons have taken up inconsistent defence and

at the same time have failed to prove the same and inspite

of it, the trial Court has erroneously come to the

conclusion that the charges are not proved. The deceased

has given dying declaration implicating the accused

persons. The same is recorded by the Taluka Executive

Magistrate. The dying declaration of the deceased is

proved through the evidence of the Taluka Executive

Magistrate as well as the Medical Officer who was present

during the recording of the same. The dying declaration in

question is supported by the testimony of the parents, the

near relatives and other witnesses. The learned trial Judge

has rejected the testimony of these witnesses coupled with

the dying declaration on flimsy grounds and as such the

impugned judgment and order is liable to be set aside.

14. The learned counsel for complainant further

submitted that the trial Court has rejected the evidence of

the prosecution witnesses by giving undue importance to

the minor discrepancies and inconsistencies which are

natural. Inspite of the fact that the deceased sustained 90-

95% burn injuries, there is overwhelming evidence to

show that she was conscious and was in a position to give

statement and in fact has clearly implicated the accused

persons. In the circumstances, the trial Court has grossly

erred in holding that with the extensive burns, the

deceased was not in a position to give statement. The

findings of the trial Court is contrary to the oral and

documentary testimony placed on record and prays to

allow the appeal and convict the accused persons.

15. In support of the appeal filed by the State, the

learned SPP submits that the trial Court ought to have

taken into consideration the evidence of PWs-1 and 2 that

accused No.3 poured kerosene and set the deceased on

fire and the other accused persons given mental

harassment for dowry. The trial Court ought to have taken

into consideration the statement of deceased Shilpa,

wherein she has implicated the accused persons and it is

corroborated by the testimony of PWs-1 and 2.

16. He would further submit that the trial Court

ought to have taken into consideration the evidence of

PWs-1 to 5 and also the documentary evidence as well as

the material objects. The testimony of these witnesses

cannot be rejected on the ground that they are related and

interested witnesses. Their evidence is required to be

scrutinized minutely and the trial Court has erred in out

right rejecting their testimony. Since the death of the

deceased has taken place within seven years of marriage,

in unnatural circumstances and in the light of the

presumption under Section 113A and 113B of the Evidence

Act and the cumulative effect of the oral and documentary

evidence placed on record, the trial Court has erred in

acquitting the accused persons and prays to allow the

appeal.

17. On the other hand, the learned counsel

representing accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 supported the

impugned Judgment and order of acquittal and submits

that taking into consideration the oral and documentary

evidence placed on record, the trial Court has come to a

correct conclusion and the same does not call for any

interference by this Court and prays to dismiss the

appeals.

18. Thus it is the definite case of the prosecution

that at the time of marriage of deceased Shilpa with

accused No.1 Amruth Gouda Patil, accused persons

demanded and received dowry in the form of gold

weighing two tholas, cash in a sum of Rs.50,000/- and

household articles and at the time of baby shower, they

demanded and received another two tholas of gold and

further under the pretext of securing employment, they

demanded and received Rs.50,000/-. Inspite of fulfilling

their demands, the accused persons were not satisfied with

the same and they used to harass and ill treat the

deceased and ultimately, on 06.03.2014, at around

5.00 a.m. accused No.3 poured kerosene on the deceased

and set her on fire, as a result of which she succumbed to

the burn injuries on 10.03.2014 at 8.45 p.m. and thereby

the accused have committed the offences punishable under

Sections 323, 302, 304B read with Section 34 of IPC and

Section 3 of the DP Act.

19. Now, it is to be seen whether the evidence

placed on record prove the charges levelled against the

accused beyond reasonable doubt. PW-1 Mallappa

Fakirappa Toravi, PW-2 Rudravva Mallappa Toravi and PW-

3 Bharmappa Fakirappa Toravi are the father, mother and

senior paternal uncle of the deceased. PW-4 Yellappa

Ningappa Vachadi and PW-5 Ningappa Mailarappa

Dandannavar are independent witnesses. The prosecution

has relied upon the evidence of these witnesses to prove

the allegations of demand and receipt of dowry at the time

of marriage as well as subsequently and also the

harassment meted out by the accused persons to the

deceased and ultimate death due to the burn injury

suffered by the deceased.

20. It is relevant to note that on 06.03.2014 after

receipt of information that deceased Shilpa suffered burn

injuries, PWs-1 to 3 have rushed to Government hospital,

Gadag and from there on the advice of the Doctor, the

deceased was shifted to KIMS hospital, Hubbali. While she

was undergoing treatment, the complainant on the basis of

the information furnished by the deceased has lodged the

complaint, stating that on the previous day after the

mother and brother of the deceased left their house on the

refusal of the accused persons to send the deceased to her

parental home for Ugadi festival, the accused person

picked up a quarrel with the deceased saying that her

parents have not fulfilled their demand for further dowry

and therefore, they would not send her to her parent's

house. Unable to bear the said harassment and

humiliation, on the next day morning at 6.00 a.m. she

poured kerosene and set herself on fire.

21. So far as demand of dowry at the time of

marriage, PW-1 Mallappa Fakirappa Toravi, the father of

deceased has stated that accused persons demanded and

received Rs.2,00,000/- in cash, five tholas of gold and

when accused No.1 came to their house for Aliyathana

(C½AiÀÄvÀ£)À they have paid Rs.50,000/- to him. On this

aspect PW-2 Rudravva Mallappa Toravi, the mother of the

deceased has stated that at the time of marriage the

accused persons demanded and received dowry in the

form of cash of Rs.50,000/-, gold weighing two tholas and

household articles. She has specifically stated that in spite

of this, the accused persons started harassing and ill-

treating the deceased demanding further dowry. When

accused No.1 came to their house for Aliyathana (C½AiÀÄvÀ£À),

they paid Rs.50,000/- to purchase a bike and at the time

of baby shower, accused No.1 was given gold ornaments

by way of gift and he also demanded money for household

expenses and the same was also paid. But in spite of it,

the harassment did not stop. While PW-2 has stated that

the accused used to harass and ill-treat as well as assault

the deceased for not fulfilling their further demand of

dowry, PW-1 has stated that they use to ill-treat her

saying that she do not know how to cook and also to do

the household work.

22. On the aspect of demand of dowry, PW-3

Bharamappa Fakirappa Toravi, the senior uncle of the

deceased has deposed that accused persons demanded

and received dowry in the form of gold weighing two tholas

and cash of Rs.50,000/-. He has also stated that another

two tholas of gold was given to accused No.1, when he

came to their house for Aliyathana (C½AiÀÄvÀ£)À . With regard

the additional sum of Rs.50,000/- given to accused No.1,

PW-1 has stated that the said sum was paid when the

accused persons demanded it saying that accused No.1 is

supposed to get employment and therefore, the said sum

is required.

23. PW-4 Yallappa Ningappa Vachadi has deposed

that at the time of marriage dowry in the form of two

tholas of gold and cash of Rs.50,000/- was paid. So far as

the household articles are concerned, he has deposed that

the same were given as per the custom prevailing in their

community. He has deposed that whenever deceased used

to visit her parental home, she used to narrate the ill-

treatment and harassment meted out by the accused

persons to her for not paying additional dowry. PW-5

Ningappa Mailarappa Dandennavar has also deposed that

at the time of marriage, accused persons demanded and

received two tholas of gold and cash in a sum of

Rs.50,000/- and again when accused No.1 visited the

parental house of the deceased for Aliyathana (C½AiÀÄvÀ£)À , a

sum of Rs.50,000/- was paid for purchasing a two wheeler

and thereafter the accused persons have also received

another sum of Rs.50,000/- for securing employment for

accused No.1.

24. Perusal of evidence of PWs-1 to 5 with regard

to the demand and receipt of dowry at the time of

marriage and subsequently, it could be seen that there is

no corroboration in their evidence. While PWs-2 to 5 have

maintained that at the time of marriage the accused

persons demanded and received Rs.50,000/- cash by way

of dowry, PW-1 who is the father of the deceased has

stated that it was Rs.2,00,000/-. His evidence to that

effect is contrary to the contents of the complaint.

25. PW-1 has deposed that the reasons for the

accused persons to harass and ill-treat the deceased was

that they were of the opinion that she does not know how

to prepare food and do household work and also for not

meeting their demand of additional dowry. However, PWs-

2 to 4 have maintained that the harassment meted out by

the accused persons was in respect of their demand for

additional dowry. For the first time, PW-1 has stated that

the harassment was on account of the deceased not

knowing how to do the household work as well as to cook.

This fact is not forthcoming in the complaint which is the

earliest version of the prosecution.

26. It is pertinent to note that about few months

prior to the date of the incident, the deceased has given

birth to a child. However, the child died immediately after

birth. During the course of the evidence, PW-3 the senior

uncle of the deceased and PW-5 independent witness have

deposed that while the deceased was pregnant, the

accused persons had kicked her in the stomach and as

such the child died immediately after its birth. This fact is

not spoken to by the PWs-1 and 2 who are the parents and

PW-4 who is also an independent witness. This fact is also

not forthcoming in their statement. It is clearly an

improvement made by these two witnesses. Thus, there is

no corroboration in the evidence of PWs-1 to 4 so far as

demand and receipt of dowry, regarding the quantum of

dowry at the time of marriage and also subsequently.

There is also clear improvement so far as the cause of

death of the child is concerned.

27. Now, coming to the actual incident in which the

deceased suffered burn injuries. In the complaint it is

stated that on the date of the incident, accused No.2

Chandregowda, telephonically informed the complainant

that while lighting the hearth the deceased has sustained

burn injuries and that she was being shifted to the Gadag

hospital and therefore they rushed to Gadag Government

hospital. It is further stated in the complaint that at the

hospital through the deceased, the complainant came to

know that on the previous day after the mother and

brother of the deceased left without her- as the accused

persons did not allow her to go, the accused picked up a

quarrel with her saying that since her parents have not

met with their demand for additional dowry, she should

not go to her parent's house. Therefore, unable to bear the

harassment and humiliation, on the next day at 6.00 a.m.

she poured kerosene and set herself on fire.

28. This was the earliest version brought on record

by the complainant with regard to the deceased having

sustained burn injuries. On this aspect, during the course

of his evidence PW-1 has deposed that while undergoing

treatment, the deceased gave a statement before the

Government officials that it was accused No.3 who poured

kerosene and set her on fire, but due to shock/confusion

(UÁ§j) in the complaint, he has stated that deceased set

herself on fire. Of course, PWs- 2 to 5 have deposed that

at the hospital through the deceased they came to know

that it was accused No.3 who poured kerosene and set the

deceased on fire. As stated in the complaint, if the

complainant came to know about the incident through the

deceased about she having herself set on fire, then the

version of the deceased in the dying declaration that it was

accused No.3 who poured kerosene and set her on fire

which is corroborated by the testimony of PWs-2 to 5 is

false or vice versa.

29. Now coming to the dying declaration of the

deceased at Ex.P7. It is recorded by PW-6, the Taluka

Executive Magistrate in the presence of duty Doctor PW-7

Raveendra Panchaxari Eligar. In the dying declaration at

Ex.P7, the deceased has stated that after the marriage

accused persons started harassing and ill-treating her

saying that she is not good looking and she should leave

the house. Referring to the incident dated 06.03.2014, the

deceased has stated that at 5.00 a.m after her husband

and father-in-law left the house, she was using kerosene

and a small amount of kerosene spilt and therefore, her

mother-in-law i.e., accused No.3 became angry, poured

the kerosene which was in the can on her, set her on fire

and ran away. Hearing her cries, accused No.2 came and

doused the fire with water. In her dying declaration, there

is no reference to the accused persons harassing and ill-

treating her for not getting an additional dowry. The only

reason given by her is that the accused were of the opinion

that she was not good looking and also she was not able to

perform household work properly and therefore, they

wanted her to leave the house.

30. If this is the true version of the deceased with

regard to the cause of burn injuries sustained by her, then

from where the complainant came to know about the

deceased dousing herself with kerosene and setting herself

on fire as stated in the complaint?. The explanation given

by the complainant that due to shock/confusion (UÁ§j) he

gave the said version cannot be accepted. When serious

allegations are being made against the accused persons

and when there are no eyewitnesses to the incident, a

heavy responsibility is on the complainant to come up with

the true version. If the version given by the complainant is

not the true version, it indicates that the deceased was not

in a position to give her statement when they enquired her

about the incident. Only to set the law in motion, the

complainant has chosen to file the said complaint making

serious allegations against the accused persons with

regard to the demand of dowry as well as harassment on

account of not fulfilling the same.

31. In the dying declaration, deceased has stated

that initially she was brought to the Government hospital

by her husband in the ambulance and from there in the

same ambulance, her parents and others brought her to

the KIMS, Hubballi. While in the dying declaration, the

deceased has stated that after her mother-in-law set her

on fire and ran away, hearing commotions, her father-in-

law i.e. accused No.2 came and doused the fire with water.

In fact PWs-1 and 2 have also deposed that through the

deceased they came to know that accused No.2 doused

the fire with water. However, PW-3 Bharamappa Fakirappa

Toravi, the senior uncle of the deceased has deposed that

while accused No.3 poured kerosene and set her on fire,

accused No.2 prevented dousing the fire. This is contrary

to the version given by the deceased in her dying

declaration.

32. It is relevant to note that PW-5 is also the

scribe of the complaint. On this aspect, during his cross-

examination he has deposed that on 07.03.2014, he wrote

the complaint at 8.30 a.m and before he wrote the

complaint, deceased spoke to them and they enquired

about the incident. He has specifically stated that before

lodging the complaint when they enquired the deceased

about the incident, she did not reveal the fact of accused

No.3 pouring kerosene and setting her on fire and for the

first time she disclosed the said fact on 08.03.2014 and

earlier to it she did not reveal the said fact. This also

creates doubt as to the veracity of the contents of the

dying declaration dated 07.03.2014 wherein for the first

time she has made allegations against accused No.3 of

having poured kerosene and set her on fire.

33. Even though PW-6 Halappa Doddakariyappa

Nagavi, the Taluk Executive Magistrate has spoken to

about the recording of dying declaration and PW-7

Dr. Raveendra Panchaxari Eligar, the Medical Officer has

spoken about his presence at the time of recording of the

dying declaration and the fact that deceased was in a fit

condition to give a statement, having regard to the fact

that the version given by her is contrary to the version put

forth in the complaint which according to the prosecution is

the first available version of the incident revealed through

the deceased, it creates doubt as to the veracity of the

dying declaration. It also puts the Court on guard as to

whether it was the true version put forth by the deceased

or she was tutored by her relatives who were all present

around her before the dying declaration was recorded by

the Taluka Executive Magistrate.

34. Moreover, in the dying declaration, there are

no allegations with regard to the demand of dowry by the

accused persons either at the time of marriage or

subsequently. It is true that one cannot expect a dying

declaration to be elaborated in detail, as according to the

prosecution's demand of dowry was the root cause for the

accused No.3 to pour kerosene and set the deceased on

fire it was expected that the deceased would have referred

to it in her dying declaration and it is very relevant which

speaks about the motive. If at all the deceased was being

harassed and ill-treated for want of more dowry at least in

a cursory way she could have stated it to be the motive.

However, according to the deceased, the motive for the

accused persons to harass her was that she was not good

looking and that they wanted her to leave their house. In

the dying declaration, there is also no reference to her not

knowing the household work and it was also one of the

reason for the accused persons to harass her. Altogether a

different version has come up in the dying declaration

whereas according to the prosecution witnesses the main

reason for accused persons to harass and ill-treat her was

on account of demand of additional dowry and not fulfilling

the same by the parents of the deceased.

35. The entire prosecution case is inconsistent and

it is not corroborated by material witnesses. When the

prosecution has no definite case, consequent evidence is

also not helpful to establish the case of the prosecution.

36. On the other hand the defence has taken up a

number of defences i.e. the deceased was studying in II

PUC when her marriage was performed and she was

interested in pursuing her studies and was reluctant to

marry accused No.1, who has studied only upto 8th

standard. The defence has also taken up a contention that

after the death of the child which took place immediately

after birth of the child, deceased started suffering from

depression and she was not involving herself in day to day

activities. She used to sit aloof and even though the

accused persons earnestly requested the parents and other

relatives of the deceased to come and counsel her and also

take her to their house, they did not heed to their request.

They have also come up with a case that before her

marriage, the deceased was in love with another person

and for that reason also she was reluctant to marry

accused No.1 and ultimately, while she was lighting the

hearth, she sustained accidental burns and taking undue

advantage of the situation, a false case came to be foisted

against the accused persons. Of course, the accused

persons have failed to prove any of these defences.

37. However, they have succeeded in creating a

doubt in the mind of the Court with regard to the

prosecution case, especially when the prosecution case is

suffering from inherent defects. The prosecution has not

come up with the true story and it appears having lost his

daughter, the complainant has chosen to file a complaint

by giving a false version as though he came to know about

the incident through the deceased, while the version given

by the deceased herself is different from the complaint

averments.

38. Taking into consideration all these aspects, the

learned trial Judge has come to a correct conclusion that

the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the

allegations against the accused persons and therefore,

chosen to acquit them. We find no reasons to interfere

with the conclusions arrived at by the learned trial Judge

especially in the light of the inconsistent, uncorroborated

testimony of the prosecution witnesses. Consequently, the

appeal filed by the complainant as well as the State fails

and accordingly, we proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

Crl.A.No.100319/2017 filed by the mother of the deceased and Crl.A.No.100034/2018 filed by the State are dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

RR