Mahadev Kareppa Muddapur vs The Kulgod Police

Anand Byrareddy

Heard the counsel for the appellant and the learned Government Advocate. The facts briefly stated are that the appellant no. 1 was accused no. 1 and he was the husband of one Ramavva. Appellant no. 2 is the mother of appellant no. 1 and there were two other accused namely, the sister of appellant no. 1 and a neighbourer who lived opposite to their house. It was alleged that about a year prior to the incident, the accused together were ill-treating the deceased Ramavva, on the ground that she did not know to cook well and was not attending to house-hold chores and was seen frequently talking to other male persons and therefore, her very fidelity was suspected and she was constantly being abused both physically and mentally. On account of this conduct of the accused, deceased Ramavva was forced and instigated to commit suicide on 27.6.2001 at about 4 p.m. by consuming pesticide. Though she was rushed to the Hospital, she died on the same day at about 5.30 p.m. It was therefore, on the basis of the complaint lodged by the father of Ramavva, that the accused were alleged to have committed offences punishable under sections 498A, 306 and 109 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. On the charges being framed against the accused, the accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution in support of its case examined 26 witnesses and had marked 41 exhibits and after the closure of the case, the trial court framed for itself the following points for consideration :-

Whether the prosecution proves that the accused no. 1 is residing with accused no. 2, accused no. 3 and the deceased Ramavva in a house and accused no. 1 being the husband of Ramavva (deceased) the accused No. 2 is mother-in-law, accused No. 3 is sister-in-law and in collusion with accused no. 4 the accused no. 1 has developed illicit intimacy with the accused. No. 4 in furtherance of their common intention you accused have harassed the said Ramavva since one year prior to her death alleging that she does not know proper cooking and doing the proper household work and she is talking with other male persons and they have suspected her character and abused her in filthy language and abused her to leave their house and assaulted by hands and thus by their acts and deeds have given both mental and physical harassment and ill-treatment and thereby committed the offence punishable under sections 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code?

Whether the prosecution proves that on 27.6.2001 at about 4 p.m.. said Ramavva due to your harassment. ill-treatment and said harassment was of such a nature that it provoked her to consume poisonous liquid and Ramavva consumed the poison on the above said date due to her harassment and she was on the way to giving medical treatment, she died at 5.40 p.m. on that day and you accused nos. 1 and 4 have given ill-treatment and by your ill-treatment has provoked her to consume the poison and commit the suicide and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 306 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code?

Whether the prosecution proves that on the above said date, time you accused Nos. 1 to 3 abused Ramavva in filthy language and assaulted her by means of hand and gave mental ill-treatment and harassed her both physically and mentally and you accused No. 4 has instigated the other accused to give harassment to Ramavva and thereby you accused No. 4 has committed an offence punishable u/s 109 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code?

On consideration of the evidence before the court, the trial court held that insofar as the offence alleged u/s 306 of the Indian Penal Code is concerned, accused nos. 1 to 4 were not found guilty of having committed the offences punishable under sections 306 and 109 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and accordingly acquitted them, Accused nos. 3 and 4 were also acquitted of the offences punishable under sections 498A read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. However, accused Nos. 1 and 2 were found guilty of having committed the offences punishable under sections 498A read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- each and in the event of default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for nine months for the offences punishable under sections 498A read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

It is therefore on the limited ground that the prosecution is said to have established a case for an offence u/s 498A, that the present appeal is filed.

The learned counsel for the appellants would take this court through the record and would point out the several infirmities insofar as the allegations and the reasoning of the court in holding that, on the basis of the evidence tendered, it could be held that the allegations had been established beyond reasonable doubt against the appellants herein, He would point out that in the complaint by the father of the deceased, there was no mention at all of any ill-treatment by the appellants except to state that the complainant had alleged that appellant no. 1 was having an illicit affair with accused no. 4 and it is on account of the same, that the accused together mixed pesticide in tea and made the deceased to consume the same in order to get rid of her. Beyond this, there was no allegation of ill-treatment. Hence, the very basis for an offence punishable u/s 498A of the Indian Penal Code was totally absent, Insofar as the witnesses who have tendered evidence in support of the case are concerned, it is the mother of the deceased, the brother of the deceased, the father of the deceased and the uncle of the deceased, who are said to have tendered evidence to establish the guilt. The learned counsel would therefore draw attention of the court to the evidence of each of these witnesses, to point out that insofar as the father of the deceased was concerned, he has merely reiterated the contents of the complaint and there is no allegation whatsoever of any ill-treatment by the accused appellants herein to the deceased, Insofar as the mother is concerned, she has again stated that appellant no. 1 was not treating the deceased properly and was in the habit of, what is stated in Kannada as, giving "kirikiri" to her, which would not clearly disclose the nature of ill-treatment and the extent of ill-treatment, which could possibly have driven the deceased to commit suicide and therefore, the ingredients of section 498A would not be met, Insofar as the brother of the deceased is concerned, it is his statement that there were constant complaints of appellant no. 1 that the deceased was not capable of preparing good food and she was also not attending to the household chores. In this regard, there were earlier altercations and the said witness had visited the appellant no. 1 at his home and had requested him to bear with the deceased and that all would be well. This again, the learned counsel for the appellant would submit, would not establish that there was ill-treatment falling within the mischief of section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Insofar as the sister of the accused is concerned, she was married and living away from the appellants'' home and could not possibly have been aware of any such alleged ill-treatment. On the other hand, the learned counsel would point out that the sisters-in-law of appellant no. 1, who were fielded as prosecution witnesses have, on the other hand, stated that the deceased was mentally unstable and was given to bouts of depression, which possibly lead her to commit suicide and the learned counsel would submit that the court below having thought it fit to acquit the accused for offences under sections 306 read with section 109 of the Indian penal C ode was in order and therefore it could not be said that the deceased had been instigated to commit suicide on account of the ill-treatment by the accused. Insofar as the independent witness PW-13 is concerned, he has merely stated that at a remote point of time, there was an incident whereby the deceased had mentioned to him that she was being accused of not being able to cook food properly and that she was also not attending to house-hold chores et.. This by itself did not disclose that there was constant ill-treatment leading to her committing suicide at the relevant point of time. The learned counsel would further point out that the charges framed by the trial court indicate the use of foul language. This the learned counsel would submit that is not on the basis of statements of any of the witnesses and there is no material on record to indicate that the appellant no. 1 had used such language at any point of time. Therefore, the charge framed on that ground, is wholly inexplicable and would vitiate the entire proceedings as being based on material which is not borne out by the record and the learned counsel would take this court through the tenor of section 498A which reads as follows:

498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty - Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three Years and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanation - for the purpose of this section, "cruelty" means -

(a) any willful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman, or

(b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.

He would point out that if at all, the offences alleged would be punishable in terms of I Part of the section and the prosecution was required to demonstrate that there was cruelty which was willful conduct of such a nature as was likely to bona a woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injure or danger to life, limb and health. In view of the trial court having found that the accused were liable to be acquitted in respect of the offences punishable tinder sections 306 read with section 109 of the Indian Penal Code, the very basis for holding that there was cruelty committed by the accused which was of such a nature as would drive her to commit suicide is totally absent and in this vein, the learned counsel would seek to urge that the trial court having thought it fit to acquit the accused of the offences punishable u/s 306 of the Indian Penal Code and also having acquitted the accused nos. 3 and 4 as there was no basis for even the allegation of having subjected the deceased to cruelty. The evidence on record not disclose any such act committed by the appellants herein whereby the court could have held that an offence u/s 498A was established beyond all reasonable doubt as against the appellants and therefore, would pray that the appeal be allowed and the judgment of the trial court be set aside.

While the learned Government Advocate would seek to justify the judgment and would seek to draw attention to the statements of the several witnesses, which according, to him, is sufficient to indicate that there was cruelty within the meaning of section 498A of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He would particularly refer to the independent witness who has stated that it was to his knowledge that the deceased was being ill-treated by the accused and particularly, the appellants herein, Therefore, he would submit that; the trial court was justified in holding that the accused were guilty of an offence punishable u/s 498A.

The learned counsel for the appellants would further brine to the attention of the court that apart from the injustice caused, that it is scanty evidence that was available on record which did not indicate that the offence punishable u/s 498A were established against the appellant. The fact remains that there are two minor daughters, who are now without the support of their father, who is held guilty of the offences and there is all the more reason to set the appellants at liberty in the face of the infirmities that are highlighted. Having regard to the above facts and circumstances and the material evidence available on record, the learned counsel for the appellants has certainly made out a case to demonstrate that the evidence available was not sufficient for the court to have held that the offences punishable u/s 498A read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code were established beyond all reasonable doubt.

Therefore, the appeal is allowed, The judgment of the court below is set aside insofar as it finds the appellants herein guilty of the offences punishable under sections 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The bail bonds furnished by the appellants shall stand cancelled.