NINGACHARI Vs. STATE BY K R PETE POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is preferred by the complainant challenging the judgment and order of acquittal dated 3.8.2012 passed by the Additional sessions Judge, Mandya in SC.No.179/2008.

(2.) Brief facts of the case of the prosecution are that complainant filed the complaint alleging that his daughter Lakshmidevi was got married to accused No.1 on 4.6.2006. The couple led marital life happily. On 14.3.2007, the complainant received information that his daughter Lakshmidevi committed suicide by hanging in her matrimonial house. Immediately himself and his family members went there and saw the dead body of the deceased. Thereafter at about 9.30 p.m., complainant filed the complaint as per Ex.P8, wherein he stated that his daughter was not happy about her marriage with accused No.1 as it was a second marriage of accused No.1 and out of dejection, she has committed suicide on 14.3.2007 at about 10.30 a.m. in her matrimonial house when there was nobody. On the basis of the complaint at Ex.P8, an UDR case was registered in UDR No.7/2007. Subsequently, Executive Magistrate held the inquest mahazar and at the time of recording the statement of the parents of the deceased, he found that the deceased might have died on account of dowry harassment. In that light, he directed the police for further investigation as per Ex.P2. In that light, a case was registered in Crime No.26/2007 by K.R.Pet Town Police for the offence punishable under Section 304B r/w. Section 34 of IPC. Thereafter, the matter was investigated into by the COD Inspector and after completion of investigation, he filed the charge sheet against the accused. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and after following the procedure, he committed the case to the Court of Sessions. The Sessions Court took cognizance, secured the presence of the accused and after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the accused, framed the charge against the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and also under Sections 498A, 304B r/w. Section 34 of IPC. Accused pleaded not guilty and as they claimed to be tried, the trial was fixed.

(3.) In order to prove its case, the prosecution has got examined 18 witnesses as PWs.1 to 18 and got marked the documents at Exs.P1 to P24 with submarking and also MO.Nos.1 to 6. Thereafter, the statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. On behalf of accused, they examined one witness as DW.1 and got marked Exs.D1 to D5. After hearing both parties, the trial Court has passed the judgment and order acquitting the accused of the offences with which they were charged. Assailing the same, the complainant is before this Court in the present appeal.