TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (8) TMI 1150
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....warded the sentence for a period of 3 years and also a fine of Rs. 5,000/- was imposed, and in default, to undergo further sentence of 6 months. The Appellant was also convicted under Section 3 of DP Act and imprisonment for a period of 5 years was awarded alongwith a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, and in default to undergo imprisonment for one year; under Section 4 of DP Act, imprisonment for a period of 6 months was awarded and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- was imposed, in default, to undergo imprisonment for 3 months. However, all the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are that: A. The Appellant got married to one Shanthi on 16.9.1994. The marriage was negotiated by their parents at the house of one Jayasingh. The parents of Shanthi gave 7 to 8 gold ornaments including a neck chain and a ring to the Appellant in the marriage. Alter the marriage, the Appellant and Shanthi were residing at the Appellant's house bearing No. 93, 2nd Cross, Basaveshwara Nagar, Magadi Road. Bangalore. It was only at a distance of one kilometre from her parents' house. It is alleged that Shanthi was ill-treated by the Appellant and als....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re, the Trial Court had rightly passed the order of acquittal. The FIR itself was lodged on 16.12.1994 though Shanthi died on 14.12.1994. The question of dowry demand would not arise. The statement made by Sarasa, sister of deceased before her family members was accepted by the High Court without realising that Sarasa was not examined by the prosecution. The High Court failed to appreciate that when two views are possible, the view beneficial to the accused must be accepted. Therefore, the appeal deserves to be allowed. 4. Per contra, Ms. Anitha Shenoy, learned Counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the appeal contending that Shanthi, a 20 year old girl died within 3 months of her marriage in the house of the Appellant. Therefore, the incident was within the special knowledge of the Appellant and he failed to explain how Shanthi had died. The Appellant doubted the fidelity of Shanthi alleging that she had developed illicit relations with Raju, a friend of her brother Manimaran (PW.2) and got pregnant before their marriage and that is why she had committed suicide. Though the medical report specifically revealed that Shanthi was not pregnant, the doubt harboured in the mind....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 9. Sakkubai (PW.6), mother of the deceased, deposed that talks for marriage took place six months prior to the marriage at the house of Jayasingh and Appellant's parents and uncles had demanded 10 sovereign gold ornaments but they expressed their ability to give only 7-8 sovereign gold ornaments. She corroborated the version of other witnesses about the quarrels and galata between the Appellant and Shanthi, deceased. That after her marriage Shanthi did not have a peaceful married life and it had been revealed by Shanthi herself to the witness that quarrels used to take place frequently between them. Shanthi, deceased, had visited her parents' house 7-8 times. 10. Hamsaveni (PW.5) deposed that talks for marriage took place at the house of Jayasingh about 1-1/2 months earlier to the marriage but she did not depose about the demand of gold ornaments. 11. Bhuvaneshwari (PW.7) who was tenant of Sundaresh (PW.1), deposed that when Shanthi visited her parents' house, she had told her that quarrels and galata used to take place between Shanthi and her husband as he had been demanding gold ring etc. 12. The aforesaid evidence reveals the following facts: I)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....riage Shanthi was ill-treated by the Appellant. 15. It is a settled legal proposition that in exceptional circumstances, the appellate court, for compelling reasons, should not hesitate to reverse a judgment of acquittal passed by the court below, if the findings so recorded by the court below are found to be perverse, i.e. if the conclusions arrived at by the court below are contrary to the evidence on record, or if the court's entire approach with respect to dealing with the evidence is found to be patently illegal, leading to the miscarriage of justice, or if its judgment is unreasonable and is based on an erroneous understanding of the law and of the facts of the case. While doing so, the appellate court must bear in mind the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused, and also that an acquittal by the court below bolsters such presumption of innocence. 16. The time when the talks of marriage were held and the place where the negotiations took place are totally irrelevant. More so, the marriage took place in September 1994, incident occurred on 14.12.1994 and evidence of the witnesses was recorded in August 1999 i.e. after 5 years of the date of marriage. Thus,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t to be minor in nature, may be a ground for disbelieving and discrediting their evidence. In such circumstances, the witnesses may not inspire confidence and if their evidence is found to be in conflict and contradiction with other evidence available or with a statement that has already been recorded, then in such a case, it cannot be held that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. 19. The defence version has been that Shanthi, deceased, had developed illicit relations with one Raju, a close friend of her brother Manimaran (PW.2) and was pregnant at the time of marriage. The Trial Court accepted this version in spite of the fact that the medical evidence was otherwise. Dr. B.R.S. Kashyap (PW.17) mentioned in the post-mortem report (Ex. P-12) that the uterus was intact. Subsequently, an explanation was specifically sought on 2.2.1995 as to whether Shanthi was pregnant at the time of death. Dr. Kashyap (PW.17) opined that she was not pregnant at the time of post-mortem examination. Dr. Kashyap (PW.17) denied the suggestion that he had issued report (Ex. P-14) in collusion with the complainant to the effect that she was not pregnant. 20. The Trial Court p....