IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S. RACHAIAH, J.
Kantharaju, S/o. Nagaraju - Petitioner
Versus
State Of Karnataka, By Kyathasandra Police Station Represented By Public Prosecutor - Respondent
Criminal Revision Petition No. 1372 Of 2019
Decided On : 17-07-2023
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 498A - Cruelty and mental torture - Appeal against conviction - Criminal Revision Petition is filed by petitioner, being aggrieved by judgment of conviction and order of sentence – As per evidence of PWs.1 and 2, it is an admitted fact that, complainant was second wife of petitioner. [Para 9]
Finding of the Court: PW.1 is considered as second wife of petitioner, obviously, complaint filed against petitioner for offence under Section 498A of IPC ought not to have been entertained - Complaint filed by second wife against husband and her inlaws is not maintainable - Courts committed error in applying principles and also law on this aspect - Therefore, interference by this Court in exercising Revisional jurisdiction is justified - Ratio of these two judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court clearly indicates that, if marriage between husband and wife ended as null and void, offence under Section 498A of IPC cannot be sustained - Complainant in her evidence, PW.2 being mother of PW.1 both have consistently deposed and admitted that, PW.1 is second wife of petitioner - Concurrent findings of Courts below in recording conviction requires to be set aside.
Result: Criminal Revision Petition is allowed.
ORDER :
1. This Criminal Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner, being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.01.2019 in C.C.No.3980/2011 on the file of the Court of the Principal Civil Judge and J.M.F.CI at Tumakuru and its confirmation judgment and order dated 04.10.2019 in Crl.A.No.2/2019 on the file of the Court of the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge at Tumakuru seeking to set aside the concurrent findings recorded by the Courts below, wherein the petitioner / accused is convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 498A of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’).
2. The petitioner is the accused before the Trial Court and appellant before the Appellate Court.
Brief facts of the case are as under:
3. It is the case of the prosecution that, the complainant married the petitioner as second wife and it is stated in the said complaint that, initially upto five years, both the petitioner and the complainant were living cordially. In the said marriage, the couple had a male child. After she gave birth to the child, she had some health issues. Later on, she was affected due to paralysis, which led her to lose control over her legs, she became incapacitated. The petitioner, due to the said health issues of the complainant, started harassing her and it is stated that, she was being subjected to cruelty and mental torture. It is further stated that, she was being abused in a filthy language and she was thrown out of the matrimonial home. After she was thrown out of the matrimonial home, she started living by running a petty shop for her livelihood. Then also, the petitioner started quarreling and threatened her that he would pour kerosene and lit fire to the shop along with her, if she continued to run petty shop in that area. Unable to tolerate the cruelty and harassment of the petitioner, the complainant has lodged a complaint before the jurisdictional police. The police have registered a case and submitted the charge sheet.
4. To prove the case of the prosecution, the prosecution examined, in all, 7 witnesses namely PWs.1 to 7 and got marked Exhibits P1 to P4. The Trial Court after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record, convicted the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appellate Court, the Appellate Court confirmed the judgment of conviction rendered by the Trial Court. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has preferred this revision petition seeking to set aside the concurrent findings.
5. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that, the Trial Court and the Appellate Court committed grave error in not appreciating the evidence and law properly, hence, the same is required to be set aside. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, the complainant being the second wife of the petitioner, the offence under Section 498A of IPC cannot be attracted and both the Courts below have committed error in not considering that aspect. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has made available and relied on the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Shivcharan Lal Verma & Another v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2007) 15 SCC 369 and P.Sivakumar & Others v. State, Rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police etc., Crl.A.No.1408-1409/2012, disposed of on 09.02.2023. Making such submission, learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the revision petition and set aside the concurrent findings of conviction.
6. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader (for short “HCGP”) justified the concurrent findings and submits that, the evidence of PWs.1 and 2 clearly indicate and prove that, PW.1 was harassed, illtreated and threatened by the petitioner. It is further stated that, the cruelty which extended to PW.1 to commit suicide, however, she decided to lead her life independently by doing own
If marriage between husband and wife ended as null and void, offence under Section 498A of IPC cannot be sustained.
A legal marriage is a prerequisite for a conviction under Section 498A IPC, and absence of marriage negates charges of cruelty and dowry demand.
Validity of marriage is crucial for conviction under Section 498A IPC.
The main legal point established is that the definition of cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code encompasses both mental and physical well-being of the wife, and actions leading to emot....
Offence of Cruelty - Convicted - Trial Court rightly modified sentence - Benefit of under Act, 1958 - Court finds that courts below have rightly convicted petitioner under Section 498-A of Indian Pen....
Cruelty under Section 498-A IPC includes both physical and mental harm, and absence of dowry demand does not negate its applicability.
The judgment establishes that for a conviction under Section 498A IPC, specific allegations of cruelty must be substantiated, and the potential for misuse of this provision must be considered in sent....
The legal sanctity of the second marriage and its implications on the applicability of Section 498A IPC and/or under Dowry Prohibition Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.