Megavath Manya vs Angothu Srinu And 5 Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 4152 Tel

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 4152 Tel
Judgement Date : 22 October, 2024

Telangana High Court

Megavath Manya vs Angothu Srinu And 5 Others on 22 October, 2024

                                  1




  THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
                  AND
 THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE J.ANIL KUMAR

             CRIMINAL APPEAL No.392 OF 2015
JUDGMENT:

(per Hon'ble Sri Justice K.Surender)

1. The appellant is the father of the deceased, who was

examined as PW1, has filed the present appeal questioning

the acquittal of the respondents/accused Nos.1 to 5 for the

offence under Section 304-B of Indian Penal Code (for short

'IPC').

2. The case of PW1 is that he has performed the

marriage of his daughter/deceased with accused No.1 by

giving dowry of Rs.3 lakhs and also dry land. They were

not blessed with children. After marriage, they lead their

marital life happily for a period of three years. Thereafter,

accused Nos.1 to 5 started harassing the deceased to get

additional dowry. The deceased was beaten 4 or 5 times

and she was sent to the house of PW1. PW1 then gave

Rs.10,000/- once to accused and immediately, after five

days, deceased was again sent back. PW1 then took the

deceased, caste elders and dropped her in the house of

accused after pacifying them. The accused started

harassing deceased for registration of land in the name of

accused No.1. Rs.5,000/- was arranged by PW1 and two

days thereafter, PW1 received a phone call stating that the

deceased committed suicide and was admitted in the

hospital at Haliya. PW1 and his wife/PW2 went to the

hospital and found the deceased dead. Thereafter, they

went to the Police Station and lodged complaint/Ex.P1.

3. On the basis of the said complaint, Police registered a

case and commenced investigation. During the course of

investigation, the Police found that there was demand for

additional dowry and unable to bear the harassment

pursuant to the said demand, the deceased committed

suicide by consuming pesticide poison. After completion of

investigation, the Police filed charge sheet against the

accused before the Magistrate Court concerned. The

learned Magistrate committed the case to the Sessions

Judge.

4. After framing of charges, during the course of trial,

the learned Sessions Judge has examined the parents of

deceased as PWs.1 and 2 and also other material witnesses

PWs.3 to 14. In support of the prosecution case, Exs.P1 to

P9 were marked and MOs.1 and 2 were also brought on

record.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant

would submit that there is clear evidence of harassment

prior to the death of the deceased. PWs.1 and 2 have stated

that on two occasions, they have given Rs.10,000/- and

Rs.5,000/- to the accused and further, the accused started

harassing the deceased for registration of certain extent of

land in the name of accused No.1. Since there is proximity

of harassment with the death of deceased, the ingredients

of Section 304-B of IPC are fulfilled. Accordingly, the

acquittal has to be reversed.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the

accused supported the findings given by the learned

Sessions Judge. Learned counsel further argued that

though the allegations are levelled, during the course of

trial, since the Sessions Court has found that the said

allegation of demand for additional dowry or providing the

amount is complete omission from the earlier statement,

acquitted the accused.

7. Having gone through the record, learned Sessions

Judge found that:

1. Even according to the witnesses, for a period of three

years after the marriage, the couple lived happily.

They did not have children. For the said reason, the

deceased committed suicide.

2. In the complaint/Ex.P1 and also in the earlier

statement recorded by the prosecution under 161

Cr.P.C., there is no mention about any demand of

land to be registered in the name of accused No.1.

3. PW1 and other witnesses stated regarding

Rs.10,000/- being given to the accused, prior to the

death of the deceased which is again an omission.

Except PWs.1 and 2 and the relatives stating

regarding alleged harassment, none of the

independent witnesses have supported the case of the

alleged harassment.

8. In cases of acquittal, Appellate Court has to be

cautious and cannot interfere with the orders of acquittal,

unless and until the findings of the learned trial Judge are

not based on record or illegal.

9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pulicherla Nagaraju

Alias Nagaraja Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh 1 held

as follows:

"15. It is now well settled that the power of the High Court in an appeal from acquittal is no different from its power in an appeal from conviction. It can review and consider the entire evidence and come to its own conclusions by either accepting the evidence rejected by the trial court or rejecting the evidence accepted by the trial court. However, if the High Court decided to depart from the conclusions reached by the trial court, it should pay due attention to the grounds on which acquittal was based and state the reasons as to why it finds the conclusions leading to the acquittal, unacceptable. It should also bear in mind that

(i) the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused is fortified by the findings of the trial court;

(ii) the accused is entitled to benefit of any doubt;

and (iii) the trial court had the advantage of examining the demeanour of the witnesses. The crux of the matter, however, is whether the High Court is able to give clear reasons to dispel the doubt raised, and reject the reasons given by the trial court."

10. The prosecution is bound to prove that in proximity

of death of the deceased, there was demand for additional

dowry. Having made such demand for additional dowry,

the deceased should have been harassed to meet such

(2006) 11 SCC 444

demand. In the present case, as seen from Ex.P1 and

earlier statements of witnesses, there is no allegation of

money being given or any harassment for registration of

land. The allegation of said money being given and

registration of land are completely improvements in the

statements made by the witnesses during the course of

trial, before the Sessions Court.