- (1.)This appeal has been preferred by the Appellants against the judgment and order dated 20th June 2008 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Criminal Appeal No. 1 of 2003. By the impugned judgment, the High Court made certain observations and affirmed the conviction and sentence passed by the trial court for the offence Under Section 498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the Indian Penal Code) and dismissed the appeal. The case of prosecution is that the complainant- Siddalingappa Yallappa Madalli (PW1), father of the deceased lodged a complaint on 14.04.1997 before the Mulagund Police Station stating that his eldest daughter - Basavennewwa was married to the Appellant (first accused) who is the son of complainant's sister. Their marriage was performed in the Basava Jayanti of 1995. After the marriage, his daughter went to the house of the accused persons. There was no trouble and a male child was born out of the wedlock. Two months thereafter, he went to Mulagund to see his daughter. The deceased started weeping on seeing him. When he questioned her, she told him that accused No. 1 ill-treated her by saying that she does not know cooking, how to clean cattle shed, field work and she is a burden to their house. She was ill-treated, particularly, by her mother-in-law (accused No. 3 - Parwatewwa), husband's brother -Ningappa, Mahantappa, Shankarappa, Malakajappa, Basappa, Ashok and husband. Sometimes, they used to beat and abuse her in filthy language. She was not given sufficient food and water and asked her to sleep in the cattle shed. She requested her father to take her at maternal home. On hearing such words from her daughter, he met the accused persons in the house and requested them not to harass his daughter. When the complainant requested the accused not to ill-treat his daughter, the accused threatened him, as not to interfere in their family affairs and they know how to treat her. Thereafter, he met the elders of the Mulagund village, Subhas Kolar and Mahantappa Mastar and requested them to advice the accused persons. He also informed the elders of his village. But there was no improvement in the way his daughter was treated. That being so, on 13.04.1997 at about 10 pm, he was informed that his daughter died in her husband's house. Immediately, he came to Mulagund to see his daughter and suspecting foul play in her death, filed a complaint on 17.04.1997 and the same was registered in Crl. No. 10/97 against all the accused persons. Thereafter, the post mortem examination of the dead body of his daughter was conducted and he took the dead body for cremation to his village.
(2.)The prosecution examined altogether 16 witnesses and relied upon Exbs. P.1 to P. 11(a) and also Nos. 1 to 7. Ex. D1 and D2 were marked from defence side.
(3.)The trial court, on appreciation of the evidence, observed that it is the husband who is expected to respect and safeguard the interest of his wife in the family and in case of neglect, harassment and torture, it is the husband who is solely responsible for such act. The trial court came to a conclusion that both accused Nos. 1 and 3 were guilty for the offence Under Section 498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code. Such finding was based on presumption that the deceased committed suicide within a period of seven years of her marriage due to harassment by accused Nos. 1 and 3.