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

2020 Supreme(Mad) 243

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
M. DHANDAPANI, J.
Ganesan - Appellant
Versus
Paramasivam & Others - Respondent
CRL.A.(MD)No. 73 of 2015
Decided On : 02-03-2020

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:R. Murugappan, Advocate. For the Respondents:R1 & R2, Babu Rajendran, Advocate, R3, K.K. Ramakrishnan, Additional Public Prosecutor.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code,1860 Section 306 and 498(A) - Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 372 - F.I.R - Injuries - Case of prosecution that due to cruelty meted out by who is husband of deceased who is father in drunken mood deceased committed suicide by self immolation by pouring kerosene over her body at about intervening night - Deceased was taken to the Government Hospital for treatment and on basis of information given by deceased third respondent Law Enforcing Agency registered case in Crime – Held, Cumulative reading of entire evidence available on record coupled with complaint and the dying declaration leads this court to irrefutable conclusion that accused were not aggressors who had instigated deceased to commit suicide - True it is that there were quarrels between spouses but definitely that was not root cause for suicidal act of deceased - Even evidence reveals that there were frequent quarrels between spouses - That being case harassment alleged to have been meted out on fateful day had resulted in suicide of deceased is too large ask of this Court to set aside acquittal - Seeing from all angles of prosecution theory this Court is of considered view that there is neither any perversity nor any illegality in decision arrived at by Court below - Apex Court in recent decision in Shailendra has reiterated ratio consistently laid down that unless acquittals were vitiated by manifest illegality or such conclusion could not have been possibly arrived at by any Court acting reasonably and judiciously and is therefore liable to be characterized as perverse proper weight should be given to presumption innocence in favor of accused – Therefore on an overall conspectus of materials available on record both oral and documentary this Court is led to irrefutable conclusion that acquittal of respondents herein ordered by Sessions Court is based on just and reasonable findings and there being no materials available on record to dislodge said findings this Court is left with no other alternative but to dismiss appeal - Appeal dismissed

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 372 of the Criminal Procedure Code, praying to call for the records pertaining to the judgment of acquittal passed in S.C.No.23 of 2014 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District and quash the same and consequently convict the respondents 1 & 2 under Sections 306 & 498(A) of IPC.)

1. The accused/respondents 1 & 2 herein, who were arrayed as A-1 and A-2 were charged and tried before the Assistant Sessions Court, Virudhunagar District in S.C.No.23 of 2014 for the offences under Section 306 and 498(A) of Indian Penal Code, and the trial Court found that the prosecution having not proved the case as against the accused/respondents 1 & 2 beyond reasonable doubt, acquitted the accused/respondents 1 & 2 herein. The petitioner/P.W.1 aggrieved by the said order of acquittal has preferred the present appeal. For the sake of convenience, the appellant petitioner is hereafter referred to as the de facto complainant and respondents 1 and 2 are referred as A1 and A2.

2. The brief facts, that are necessary for disposal of this appeal, are as hereunder:-

2.1. It is the case of the prosecution that due to cruelty meted out by A-1, who is the husband of the deceased and A-2, who is the father of A-1, in drunken mood, the deceased Theerthakarai committed suicide by self immolation by pouring kerosene over her body at about 1.00 a.m. on the intervening night of 8.06.2013 and 9.06.13. The deceased was taken to the Government Hospital for treatment and on the basis of information given by the deceased, the third respondent, the Law Enforcing Agency, registered a case in Crime No.119 of 2013.

2.2. P.W.1, the de facto complainant, is the father of the deceased Theerthakarai; P.W.2 is the mother of the deceased and P.W.3 is the brother of the deceased. The marriage between the deceased and A-1 was solemnized during the month of February 2010 and they were blessed with a male child. The habit of A-1 consuming alcohol led to matrimonial disputes between the spouses and on the fateful day, i.e., on 08.06.2013 at about midnight 01:00 a.m., the deceased committed suicide by pouring kerosene over her body and setting herself on flames. She was taken to the Government Hospital, Madurai , for treatment, where she succumbed to the burn injuries after five days of the occurrence.

2.3. On information, the law enforcing agency, initially registered a case on the basis of the statement of the deceased Theerthakarai. In view of the deteriorating condition of the deceased, on account of the burn injuries, the dying declaration of the deceased was recorded by P.W.14, the learned Judicial Magistrate, which was attested to by P.W.1 and P.W.2. However, after the demise of Theerthakarai, a written complaint, Ex.P-1, was lodged by P.W.1 with P.W.13, Sub Inspector of Police, Aviyoor Police Station. On receipt of the said complaint, a case was registered by P.W.13 by preparing printed F.I.R., Ex.P-8. Since the death had happened within seven years of the marriage, inquest was conducted by P.W.12, the Revenue Divisional Officer. Printed F.I.R. was forwarded to the learned Judicial Magistrate and also to the higher officials, whereinafter P.W.15, the Deputy Superintendent of Police took up investigation. Thereafter, the investigation was handed over to P.W.16, the Inspector of Police, who went to the scene of occurrence and prepared observation mahazar, Ex.P-12 and drew the rough sketch. He examined witnesses and recorded their statements. He also examined the doctors and recorded their statements. The body of the deceased was sent for post-mortem and P.W.9, the doctor, conducted post-mortem on the body of the deceased. After completing the investigation, P.W.16 filed the final report against the accused/respondents for the offences u/s 306 and 498-A IPC.

2.4. The accused/respondents herein were furnished with the relied upon documents under Section 207 Cr.P.C. and the case was committed to t

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top