SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(Kar) 123

Karnataka High Court
State of Karnataka - Appellant
Versus
Anni Poojary - Respondent
Decided On : 02-17-04

Headnote:Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Sections 221 and 222 - Absence of charge under a penal provision - Conviction - Permissibility.

       [N. S. Veerabhadraiah, J]: There is no charge for the offence under Section 498A IPC. But the ingredients for the offence under Section 498A are forthcoming from the testimony of P.Ws 1 to 6 for which the accused is also liable to be convicted by reason of Section 221 and 222 of Cr.P.C.

       Cases Referred: AIR 2002 SCW 4391; 2002 (6) Sup 66; (2002) (1) Sup 545 ; 2002 (3) Sup 650.

       Conviction

       INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860

       Section 498-A - Conviction - No charge under Section 498-A - But evidence forthcoming from prosecution witnesses - Accused can be convicted.

       [N. S. Veerabhadraiah, J]: There is no charge for the offence under Section 498A IPC. But the ingredients for the offence under Section 498A are forthcoming from the testimony of P.Ws 1 to 6 for which the accused is also liable to be convicted by reason of Section 221 and 222 of Cr.P.C.

       Cases Referred: AIR 2002 SCW 4391; 2002 (6)Sup 66; (2002)(1) Sup 545; 2002(3) Sup 650.

       Appeal against acquittal

       CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973

       Section 378(1) - Appeal against acquittal - Order of acquittal - When can be set aside.

       [N. S. Veerabhadraiah, J]: In the appeal by the State assailing the judgement of acquittal, if the Judgment suffers from serious illegalities including ignorance or misreading of evidence on record and the findings of the Court below are only unreasonable or perverse and not based on the evidence on record, the appellate court will be justified in setting aside such an order of acquittal.

       Appreciation of evidence

       CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973

       Section 378(1) - Appreciation of evidence - Court should reassess evidence and discover truth by separating grain from chaff.

       [N. S. Veerabhadraiah, J]: In the light of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses on record, it is the duty of the Court to reassess the evidence and to discover the truth by separating the grain from the chaff instead of taking an easy course of rejecting the evidence in its entirety only on the ground of certain infirmities.

( 1 ) THE accused in the thrust of obtaining consent for the second marriage from his wife subjected her to cruelty and harassment. As a result of harassment and pestering and also due to the willful conduct ended in the ghastly Incident where she administered poison to the three minor sons and committed suicide.

( 2 ) THIS is the State appeal assailing the judgment of acquittal of the accused for the offence under Section 306, IPC in SC. No. 41/1994 on the file of Sessions Judge, D. K. Mangalore, dated 8-9-1998.

( 3 ) THE gist of the prosecution case is as follows :- the marriage of the deceased Smt. Rathna poojarthi took place during 1979 with the accused Anni Poojary at Idu village. Out of their wedlock, the deceased gave birth to 3 sons viz. , Anand, aged about 12 years, Raju aged about 10 years and Sadananda, aged about 9 years. Later, they shifted to mantrady village and were residing at some distance from the house of PW-1 Veerappa poojary, PW-2, Smt. Kamala (the mother of the deceased) and PW-3, Vijaya (the sister of the deceased ). The avocation of the accused was to play instrumental music whenever he was invited in some functions. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused anni Poojary was subjecting his wife Rathna poojarthi to harassment and ill-treatment and was assaulting and pestering her to give consent for the second marriage. That two days' prior to her committing suicide as well as administering poison to her sons, it is alleged that the accused assaulted his wife rathna Poojarthi to give consent for his second marriage. The deceased Rathna poojarthi having frustrated in life due to the act of her husband's harassment took an extreme step of committing suicide on the intervening night of 30/31st March, 1993 as well as administered poison to her three sons namely, Anand, Raju and Sadananda. As a result, all the four died. On the next day morning as the door of the house was not opened and as there was no response, pw-1 Veerapa Poojary the brother of the deceased Rathna Poojarthi entered the house by opening the thatched door and saw the dead bodies of the deceased and her three children. He also noticed a red coloured liquid near that place and paradon packet (pesticide ). He sent words to the accused who had gone to Panchar village on his work. On his return he proceeded to moodabidri Police Station and narrated the incident. His complaint was reduced into writing as per Ex. P1 by PW-10 the sub-Inspector of Police A. K. Nair. PW-10 on the basis of the complaint registered a case in crime No. 35/93 for the offences under Sections 302 and 498a of IPC and issued the fir Ex. P9. The FIR was sent to Court through PW-8 Neelayya Poojary, Police Constable. He proceeded to the spot and prepared the inquest on the dead bodies as per exs. P2 to P5 in between 3. 30 p. m. to 8. 30 p. m. He recorded the statement of witnesses pws-2, 3 and 4. He seized paradon powder (poison) from the spot. He also seized red coloured liquid in a vessel and the piece of omlette and subjected it to PF. No. 54/1993. He sent requisition to Primary Health Center, Moodabidri for conducting autopsy on the dead bodies. The Dr. B. B. Shenoy-PW-7 conducted post mortem examination on the dead bodies and issued the post mortem report as per Exs. P6, 7, 10 and 11. On 31-3-1993 at about 9. 30 p. m. , he arrested the accused and produced before the Court on 1-4-1993. After collecting the report and other materials and on completion of the investigation, filed charge-sheet against the accused for the offence under Section 306, ipc.

( 4 ) THE learned Sessions Judge secured the presence of the accused, framed charges for the offence under Section 306, IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be not tried. The prosecution in all examined PWs. 1 to 10, marked Exs. P1 to 12. The defence got marked Ex. D1 from the statement of PW-5. The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313, cr. P. C. The defence is one of total denial. The






















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top