Dismissed

State of Kerala v. Vinayan

Kerala HC7 Jan 2016CRL.A/1339/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court dismissed the state's appeal against the Session Court's acquittal of three accused in a dowry-related suicide case. The judge held that the deceased's writings and the evidence failed to prove harassment or abetting of suicide by the accused.

What did the court decide?

The criminal appeal filed by the State is dismissed, affirming the trial court's judgment of acquittal.

State of Kerala Vs Vinayan — Dowry and Cruelty | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/17TH POUSHA, 1937

¶5

CRL.A.No. 1339 of 2004

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN SC 556/2000 OF COURT OF SESSION, KOLLAM DATED 07-03-2003

¶7

APPELLANT(S)/COMPLAINANT :-

¶8

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶9

BY SMT.SHEEBA M.T., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/ACCUSED :-

¶11

1. VINAYAN, S/O.LEKSHMANAN, OOZHATHIL VEEDU, PALATHARA WARD, VADAKKEVILA VILLAGE.

¶12

2. YESODHA, D/O.KUNJAMMA, OOZHATHIL VEEDU, PALATHARA WARD, VADAKKEVILA VILLAGE.

¶13

3. THANKAMANI, D/O. YESODHA, OOZHATHIL VEEDU, PALATHARA WARD, VADAKKEVILA VILLAGE.

¶14

R1 TO R3 BY ADVS. SRI.V.G.ARUN

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

rkj

¶17

P.UBAID, J.

¶18

============================ Crl.Appeal No.1339 of 2004

¶19

============================ Dated this the 7^th day of January, 2016

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The three respondents herein faced prosecution before the Court of Session, Kollam in S.C.No.556 of 2000 under Sections 304(B) and 306 IPC, on the allegation that Veena, the wife of the first respondent had been subjected to mental and physical harassment by the three accused, and that due to the said torture and harassment by demanding more dowry and ornaments, and otherwise, Veena committed suicide. It is alleged that even soon before her death, Veena had been subjected to mental and physical harassment by demanding dowry and ornaments. The first respondent herein is the husband of deceased Veena, the 2^nd respondent is the mother-in-law, and the 3^rd respondent is the sister-in-law.

¶22

Crl.Appeal No.1339 of 2004 2

¶23

All the three respondents pleaded not guilty to the charge framed against them by the trial court, and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined thirteen witnesses including the first informant, and proved Ext.P1 to Ext.P13 documents. The MO1 to MO5 material objects were also identified during trial. When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., all the three accused denied the incriminating circumstances, and submitted that they had not in any manner harassed deceased Veena mentally or physically. Inspite of opportunities, the accused did not adduce any evidence. However, the Exts.D1 and D2 contradictions in the statements of the material witnesses were marked during trial. On an appreciation of the evidence, the learned trial Judge found that the prosecution does not have any satisfactory material to prove the offences alleged. Accordingly, the three accused were acquitted by judgment dated 07.03.2003 in S.C.No. 556 of 2000. Aggrieved by the said judgment of acquittal, the State has come up in appeal.

¶24

On hearing both sides, and on a perusal of the case records, I find that the three respondents herein were

¶25

Crl.Appeal No.1339 of 2004 3

¶26

rightly acquitted by the learned trial Judge. Though the prosecution examined thirteen witnesses the prosecution actually relied on the evidence of PW2 to PW4, the Exts.P1 and P2 documents, and the MO1 diary. PW1 is only the person who set the law in motion. PW2 and PW3 are the parents of the deceased, and PW4 is the brother in law. Ofcourse PW3 and PW4 stated in evidence that deceased Veena had been subjected to some harassment by the husband and the in-laws. Deceased Veena was first married by one Rajan, the brother of the first accused. After about three years, Rajan died due to Cancer. As requested by all, the first accused later married Veena. It was an arranged marriage, and the matrimony of Veena, and the first accused was very happy at the initial stage. It is alleged that later the husband and the in-laws started demanding more dowry and ornaments saying that, the first accused being a qualified engineer, he would have got a better alliance.

¶27

Ext.P2 is said to be a letter written by Veena, and Ext.P3 is the suicide note. MO1 is a diary which contains some writings made by the deceased. As regards the

¶28

Crl.Appeal No.1339 of 2004 4

¶29

handwriting in these materials, there is no dispute. When such documents are there admittedly containing the writings made by the deceased, indicating the cause of death, the oral evidence given by the relatives of the deceased regarding the cause of death otherwise cannot have much value. In the Ext.P3 suicide note, Veena does not implicate anybody. This suicide note does not contain anything regarding the cause of death except that she thought of putting an end to her life due to some dejection or disappointment in life. The Ext.P2 letter also does not contain anything except that she had some sort of dejection or frustration in life. The MO1 diary also does not contain any entry or writing indicating the role or involvement of any of the accused in any manner in the commission of suicide by Veena.

¶30

Ofcourse it is true that Sections 113(A) and 113 (B) of the Indian Evidence Act contain some presumptions. To apply the presumption under Section 113(A) of the Evidence Act, the prosecution must initially prove that the deceased had been subjected to mental or physical

¶31

Crl.Appeal No.1339 of 2004 5

¶32

harassment. To apply the presumption under Section 113(B) of the Evidence Act, the prosecution must prove that the deceased had been subjected to mental or physical harassment soon before her death, for or in connection with demand for dowry. Any sort of harassment; be it in connection with demand for dowry or not, will come under Section 306 IPC. But for a prosecution under Section 304(B) IPC, it must be proved that such mental or physical harassment, was made for or in connection with demand for dowry, and that the deceased had been so subjected to harassment soon before her death. Thus it is quite clear that there is an initial burden on the part of the prosecution to prove the essentials before going the to the presumptions under the law.

¶33

PW2 to PW4, the parents and the brother in law of the deceased have stated something in evidence regarding the miseries of Veena in her life. The evidence given by the witnesses against the accused can be accepted by the Court, and the Court can attach some value to their evidence only if it is supported by some material in Ext.P2 letter or the Ext.P3

¶34

Crl.Appeal No.1339 of 2004 6

¶35

suicide note or the MO1 diary when these materials do not contain anything indicating the role of the accused in any manner in the commission of suicide, the statements given by the witnesses cannot be accepted by the Court. The evidence given by the material witnesses can be accepted as regards the cause of death, if these statements are in any manner supported by the writings made by the deceased in the diary, or in the letter, or in the suicide note.

¶36

For a finding against the accused under Section 306 IPC, or under Section 304(B) IPC, it must be proved that there is some nexus between the alleged acts of cruelty, and the commission of suicide. In cases like this, there will be only the statements given by the deceased prior to her death, proving the cause of death. Such statements will come under Section 32 of the Evidence Act. The writings made by the deceased also, revealing or indicating the cause of death, will come under Section 32 of the Evidence Act. When such writings are there, those writings will have more value than the statements given by the deceased to others prior to her death. The evidence given by the witnesses

¶37

Crl.Appeal No.1339 of 2004 7

¶38

regarding the statements made by the deceased will be the things retold by the witnesses, whereas the other materials contained in the writings of the deceased can be accepted as direct evidence under Section 32 of the Evidence Act. In this case, I find nothing in the Ext.P2 letter, or in the Ext.P3 suicide note, or in the MO1 diary indicating the cause of death, except that Veena decided to put an end to her life due to some dejection or disappointment or frustration in her life. For a finding against the accused under Section 304(B) IPC or under Section 306 IPC, there must be satisfactory evidence to prove that commission of suicide by the deceased was abetted by the accused. If the deceased decided on her own to put an end to her life due to her own reasons, or due to some dejection or disappointment or frustration in her life, the husband or the in-laws cannot be prosecuted.

¶39

On an appreciation of the evidence given by the material witnesses, and also on an examination of the materials containing the writings of the deceased, I find that there is absolutely nothing in these writings indicating that

¶40

Crl.Appeal No.1339 of 2004 8

¶41

the deceased had been at any time, or in any manner physically or mentally harassed by the accused, or that commission or suicide by Veena was in any manner abetted by the accused. Veena had her own reasons to commit suicide. On an appreciation of the entire materials, I find that the respondents were rightly acquitted by the trial court on the finding that they are not guilty, or that the prosecution does not have satisfactory materials or evidence to prove the offences alleged. Thus this appeal brought by the State deserves dismissal.

¶42

PW2, the mother of the deceased had brought a revision before this Court as Crl.R.P.No.2336 of 2003 against the judgment of acquittal. When the revision came up for hearing on 28.08.2008, the parties submitted that the matter stands amicably settled between the parties, and that the revision is not pressed. Accordingly, this Court dismissed the said revision as not pressed on 28.08.2008. Copy of the order in Crl.R.P.No.2336 of 2003 was shown to me by the learned counsel during the proceedings. Anyway, even otherwise I find no reason to interfere with the findings made

¶43

Crl.Appeal No.1339 of 2004 9

¶44

by the trial court, or the judgment of acquittal in favour of the respondents.

¶45

In the result, this appeal brought by the State is

dismissed.

Sd/-

P.UBAID JUDGE

rkj

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

State of Kerala v. Vinayan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Kerala v. Vinayan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muhammed Shafi Vs the State of Kerala

Soban Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Jayan K.M Vs State of Kerala

State of Kerala Vs Hydrose

Syam Prakash @ Jose Vs State of Kerala

Jayanandakumar v. Vs Dr.Rajan N.Khobragrade IAS