- (1.)ON 23-8-2001, one deceased mohan Kumar got married to accused No. 1 chaitra. After the marriage, Chaitra who was not desirous of making a living in a joint family, insisted that her husband should arrange for a separate living. She hardly stayed in the matrimonial home for a period of two weeks. She left the house of her husband and started living in the house of her parents. The parents of Mohan Kumar, to settle the life of the newly married couple, organised a separate house for them and in the said house the accused No. 1 Chaitra and her husband stayed for a period of one month. Thereafter, Chaitra made a grievance that the house is very small and if her husband Mohan Kumar is in a position to provide a big bungalow and lead a luxurious life, he can do so or otherwise he should forget her. She also stated that he is incapable of organising a big house and he should hang himself. She removed the sacred thali and threw it on him and went away to her parent's house. Thereafter, Mohan Kumar after consulting his father-the complainant herein sent a legal notice to Chaitra calling upon her to come and join him. There was no response to the said notice at all. The deceased Mohan kumar and his mother had been to the house of Chaitra and made a request that she should join Mohan Kumar. Chaitra demanded that the property standing in the name of Mohan kumar should be transferred to her name and only then she would join Mohan Kumar or otherwise she will continue to live in her parents house. She also said that Mohan Kumar should not make frequent visits to her house and trouble her. She abused him saying that a man with respect would not frequent to the house and make repeated requests. She humiliated mohan Kumar. The other accused persons namely Suvarnadevi-mother of accused no. 1, Charan, the brother of accused no. 1 and Chandan, another brother of accused no. 1, altogether harassed Mohan Kumar. It is alleged that he was also assaulted by the said persons. But it is pertinent to note that it is not stated in the complaint that a complaint was lodged with regard to the said incident either by the Mohan Kumar or the complainant in the instant case. It is complained that mohan Kumar was being looked down upon by his parents-in-law and his wife. He was harassed and humiliated and that he felt that he should end his life. When he informed the complainant he was consoled by the complainant and his family members.
(2.)THAT on 24-3-2002, in the afternoon, mohan Kumar informed the complainant that he is going to the house of Chaitra to make a request and ask her to come and join him. But he did not return at all till 11. 30 p. m. One chandra Shekar who was the relative of the complainant gave a phone call and informed the complainant that Mohan Kumar had consumed poison in the landed property of the complainant in Hanumanthegowdana Palya near the Farm House and immediately Mohan kumar was admitted to the Hospital. The complainant and his wife went to the Hospital and found him being treated by the Doctors and on 25-3-2002 at about 11. 00 a. m. Mohan kumar breathed his last. Even on the next day i. e. from the date of the incident till the lodging of the complaint, the family was in bereavement and as such according to the complainant he lodged the complaint on 29-3-2002. The Police registered a case and after investigation filed a charge sheet against the petitioners accused herein for an offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 IPC and when the matter was set down for addressing arguments before the charge, the accused persons sought for discharge. The trial judge, by order dated 13-6-2005 rejected the claim of the petitioners for discharge and directed to frame charges against the petitioners for an offence punishable under Section 306 r/w 34 IPC.
(3.)DURING the course of investigation it is revealed, Chandrashekar, who saw the deceased Mohan Kumar who had consumed poison gave a phone call to the complainant and admitted Mohan Kumar to the hospital. K. Kumar C. W. 4 is an employee of the Farm house. C. W. 5 Radhakrishna is the son-in-law of the complainant. All these witnesses have made statements during the course of investigation to the effect that Mohan Kumar was married to the first petitioner herein. There was no compatibility between the husband and wife and first petitioner stayed with him hardly for two weeks in the matrimonial house. Thereafter a separate house was set up even then they could hardly make a living for one week. The first petitioner returned to the parent's house. The witnesses have stated that mohan Kumar was repeatedly going to the house of petitioners herein and requesting the first petitioner to join him as his wife and make a living with him which was being refused by the first petitioner. The statements of all these witnesses which are referred to above were earlier recorded at the time of inquest proceedings. The said statements so recorded would only show that there was no compatibility between the husband and wife and because of the said fact Mohan Kumar was upset. The statement of Chandrashekar and that of Kumar would reveal that Mohan Kumar was upset because of the humiliation and harassment meted out to him when he had been to call back his wife. They claim that he expressed before them that he was not desirous of making a living. The reading of the statements and the averments in the complaint would all go to establish that though petitioner No. 1 was not willing to make a living with Mohan kumar he was persistently making trips to the house of the petitioner No. I/accused and asking her to join him. The complaint also reveals that a notice was sent through an advocate calling upon the first petitioner to join her husband, according to the prosecution mohan Kumar consumed poison on 24-3-2002, he died on 25-3-2002 and the complaint is filed on 29-3-2002. Immediately after the death inquest proceedings were held and during the course of inquest, the complainant was also examined. The averments as found in the complaint and in his further statement do not find a place in the statement recorded at the time of the inquest.