S PRAVEEN Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. The petitioner was the accused before the trial court in the following circumstances:

(2.) It transpires that the petitioner, along with an advocate, had met the complainant and had expressed that the marriage between the petitioner and the complainant was not possible, since they belonged to different castes and that the families may not reconcile to the same. In this background, the complainant had again met accused no.2, the mother of the petitioner and intimated her about the petitioner's attitude. She was again reassured that the petitioner would be persuaded to marry her, but nothing changed. Therefore, the complainant lodged a complaint before the J.P.Nagar Police Station on 24.11.2006. On 25.11.2006, the petitioner is said to have gone along with the complainant to J.P.Nagar Police Station and the Police had convinced the petitioner that he had no choice, but to marry the complainant. The complainant, therefore, had claimed that they were married at Ganapathi temple at 4th Block, J.P.Nagar, Bangalore and the mother of the petitioner had also attended the marriage.

(3.) It is her further case that since the petitioner had expressed that he had no money to set up a home, she had paid cash of Rs. 50,000/- and also handed over two bangles, in order that he may use the same for setting up a home. It is her allegation that the petitioner did not do so, but misused the amount for himself. Thereafter, on 29.12.2006, the complainant is again said to have approached the J.P.Nagar Police and informed them of the conduct of the petitioner. The presence of the petitioner was again secured on 31.12.2006 and it is claimed that there was reproachment brought about by the Police once again, but however, the petitioner is said to have deserted the complainant by February 2007. Therefore, the complainant is said to have visited Dwaralu village to meet the parents of the petitioner. But the father of the petitioner had not permitted her to enter their house and had chased her away. Therefore, she had proceeded to the Tavarekere Police Station, which refused to receive any complaint. Thereafter, with the intervention of the Superintendent of Police, Tumkur, a complaint is said to have been lodged on 9.2.2007, which was forwarded to the jurisdictional Police and a case came to be registered. Further investigation having been taken up, a charge-sheet was filed against the petitioner and his parents. Since the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried, the prosecution examined 13 witnesses and marked Exhibits - P1 to P24.