Defacto complainant appealed against acquittal of his son-in-law's family on charges of dowry harassment, abetment of suicide and dowry death after his daughter's hanging death within seven years of marriage. The High Court found contradictions in witness testimony, no credible dowry demand or instigation, and confirmed the acquittal.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Reserved on Pronounced on 02.07.2024 05.09.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
CRL. A. NO. 322 OF 2021 S.Umapathy .. Appellant - Vs - 1. D.Ramesh @ Boopathy 2. D.Ramamurthy Dilli (Died) 3. R.Bhuvaneshwari 4. The State, rep. By its Inspector of Police Ambattur Police Station Tiruvallur District. .. Respondents
Criminal Appeal filed u/s 372 Cr.P.C.praying to set aside the order of acquittal dated 24.02.2020 made in S.C. No.253/2016 by the learned Magalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court), Thiruvallur, by allowing this Criminal Appeal.
For Appellant : Mr. S.Guruprasad 1
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
For Respondents : Mr. K.Selvakumaraswami for Mr. P.Jayachandran for R-1 Mr. V.Parthiban for Mr. V.P.Dillibabu for RR-2 & 3 Mr. G.V.Kasthuri, APP for R-4
JUDGMENT
The acquittal of the respondents through the judgment dated 24.02.2020
in S.C. No.253/2016 by the learned Sessions Judge, Magalir Neethimandram,
Tiruvallur, is put in issue by the defacto complainant by filing the present appeal.
A-1 is the husband of the deceased; A-2 and A-3 are the brother and father
of A-1 and A-4 is the wife of A-2. P.W.1 is the father of the deceased. The
2
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
marriage between A-1 and the deceased was solemnized on 4.12.2011. It is alleged by the prosecution that A-1 under the tutoring of A-2 to A-4 was constantly demanding dowry. Initially the A-1 demanded a sum of Rs.5,00,000/for the purchase of a lorry and P.W.1 made available a sum of Rs.1,50,000/-. Thereafter, A-2 to A-4 demanded a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- for the purchase of a land and P.W.1, pledging the jewels of the deceased to an extent of about 15 sovereigns, made a ready a sum of Rs.2,20,000/- and along with the said amount, he gave a sum of Rs.30,000/-, in all a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- to A-1.
3
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
her parental house after birth of the child, A-1 and the deceased were living in
the rented portion of the house of P.W.5.
4
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
No.887/2013, took up investigation. Since the deceased had died within seven years from the date of marriage, P.W.13, made a request to the Revenue Divisional Officer for conducting inquest over the dead body of the deceased.
5
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
Government Hospital for conducting autopsy on the body of the deceased. P.W.13 changed the section of offence to one u/s 498 (A), 306 and 304 (B) IPC
and prepared alteration report, Ex.P-16.
the Government Hospital, Kilpauk, conducted post-mortem on the body of the
deceased. During post-mortem, the doctor found the following on the body of the deceased :-
“Injuries :
A faint incomplete, asymmetrically oblique, brownish ligature abrasion 20 cm on the front and sides of the nect at the level of thyroid cartilage and crossing the posterior hairline. The upper border of ligature mark to right mastoid process is 7 cm with width 2 cm to the chin is 7 cm with width 2 cm and to the left mastoid process is 6 cm with width 2 cm, the lower border of ligature mark to the sterna notch is 6 cm.
On dissection : The base of the ligature abrasion is dry, pale and parchment like, the underlying neck structure and subcutaneous soft tissues of the neck are pale, the hyoid bone and other laryngeal cartilages were intact. There were no other external or internal injuries anywhere on the body.
6
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
Heart : Normal in size, multiple petechialhaemorrhage seen over surface of left ventricle. C/S : Right side chambers contained fluid blood. Left side chambers were empty.
Valves : Normal. Coronaries : Patent. Freat Vessels : Normal.
Lungs : Normal in size. Multiple sub-pleural petechial haemorrhages on the surface of both the lungs. C/S : Congested.
Stomach : 100 gms., of partly digested food particles with no
specific smell. Mucosa : Normal.
Intestines : Brown chime present.
All internal organs : Normal in size. C/S : Congested.
Bladder : Empty. Pelvis and Spinal column : Intact. Scalp/Duramater/Skull Bones : Intact. Brain : Edematous. Surface vessels engorged. C/S : Congested. Viscera sent for
chemical analysis.
Opinion as to cause of death –
(a) .......
(b) The deceased would appear to have died of Asphyxia due
to hanging.”
After completion of post-mortem, the doctor issued Ex.P-8, post-mortem
certificate opining that the deceased would appear to have died of asphyxia due
to hanging.
7
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
various dates and sent them for judicial remand. Upon receipt of the inquest report and RDO’s report, Exs.P-10 and P-11 and after examining the other witnesses and after obtaining the expert opinion, P.W.13 filed the final report against the accused before the jurisdictional court on 15.5.2014.
and other materials, acquitted the accused/respondents herein aggrieved by
8
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
which, P.W.1, the defacto complainant has filed the present appeal challenging
the said acquittal.
mental cruelty meted out to the deceased by A-1 as spoken to by P.W.s 1, 2 and
9
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
the deceased was a strong willed person, as spoken to by P.W.2, the mother, yet she had committed suicide, which itself would be proof of the extent of mental harassment meted out to the deceased, which clearly attracts Section 306 IPC.
10
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
demand for dowry stands established by the demand for lorry and a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- for the purchase of land and also the demand for Rs.50,000/- and 5 sovereigns of gold at the time of Seemandham of the deceased, which have been spoken to by P.w.s 1 to 4 clearly establish that the offence u/s 498 (A) and 304 (B) have been made out. The respondents have not taken any steps to disprove the said evidence and in the absence of the same, the appreciation of the evidence by the trial court is flawed and the acquittal based on such appreciation deserves to be set aside.
presumption of innocence of the respondents stands strengthened by the order
11
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
of acquittal of the respondents and in such a situation unless there is glaring discrepancies in the appreciation of the evidence, the appellate court shall not interfere with the said order in exercise of its appellate powers.
many inconsistencies, infirmities and contradictions in the evidence of P.W.s 1 to 6, which have been properly appreciated by the court below. It is the further submission that there is contradiction even with regard to the author of Ex.P-1 and also the time at which the said complaint had come into existence. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that in fact, it is the 1st respondent/A-1, who had gone to the police station upon coming to know of the suicide of the
deceased to lodge the complaint and the police had accompanied A-1 to the scene of occurrence, which stands established even through the evidence of P.W.1. Such being the case, rightly the court below had appreciated the act of A-
1 in the light of the deposition of the witnesses and acquitted the accused.
there was no allegation of dowry demand made by P.W.s 1 to 4, which clearly
12
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
show that it is only an improvisation resulting in bringing in an element of dowry
demand. Further, even according to the prosecution, the marriage was performed by the respondents, which clearly show that there was no demand made by the respondents. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that it is not the case of the prosecution that at the time of marriage, there was demand for dowry, but it is only that the deceased was given the jewels and other srtidhana items by her parents. Such being the case, the dowry demand, alleged to have been made at a later point of time, is only to fasten the death of the deceased on the accused.
13
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the materials available on record.
14
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
37. This Court in the case of Rajesh Prasad v. State of Bihar and Anr. (2022 (3) SCC 471) encapsulated the legal position covering the field after considering various earlier judgments and held as below: -
“29. After referring to a catena of judgments, this Court culled out the following general principles regarding the powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal in the following words: (Chandrappa case [Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka, (2007) 4 SCC 415]
“42. From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal emerge:
(1) An appellate court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded.
(2) The Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power and an appellate court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both on questions of fact and of law.
(3) Various expressions, such as, “substantial and compelling reasons”, “good and sufficient grounds”, “very strong circumstances”, “distorted conclusions”, “glaring mistakes”, etc. are not intended to curtail
15
extensive powers of an appellate court in an appeal against acquittal. Such phraseologies are more in the nature of “flourishes of language” to emphasise the reluctance of an appellate court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of the court to review the evidence and to come to its own conclusion.
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
(4) An appellate court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial court.
(5) If two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial court.”
38. Further, in the case of H.D. Sundara & Ors. v. State of Karnataka (2023 (9) SCC 581) this Court summarized the principles governing the exercise of appellate jurisdiction while dealing with an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 of CrPC as follows: -
16
“8.1. The acquittal of the accused further
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
strengthens the presumption of innocence;
8.2. The appellate court, while hearing an appeal against acquittal, is entitled to reappreciate the oral and documentary evidence;
8.3. The appellate court, while deciding an appeal against acquittal, after reappreciating the evidence, is required to consider whether the view taken by the trial court is a possible view which could have been taken on the basis of the evidence on record;
8.4. If the view taken is a possible view, the appellate court cannot overturn the order of acquittal on the ground that another view was also possible; and
8.5. The appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal only if it comes to a finding that the only conclusion which can be recorded on the basis of the evidence on record was that the guilt of the accused was proved beyond a reasonable doubt and no other conclusion was possible.”
39. Thus, it is beyond the pale of doubt that the scope of interference by an appellate Court for reversing the judgment of acquittal recorded by the trial Court in favour of the accused has to be exercised within the four corners of the following principles:-
17
(a) That the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity;
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
(b) That the same is based on a misreading/omission to consider material evidence on record;
(c) That no two reasonable views are possible and only the view consistent with the guilt of the accused is possible from the evidence available on record.
40. The appellate Court, in order to interfere with the judgment of acquittal would have to record pertinent findings on the above factors if it is inclined to reverse the judgment of acquittal rendered by the trial Court.”
(Emphasis Supplied)
doubt that the power of this Court is not curtailed or limited, as it is within its realm to reappreciate the evidence available on record to render a finding. However, in reappreciating the evidence, this Court has to see whether the view taken by the trial court could not be taken by any prudent man on appreciating
the materials available before it. If the view taken by the trial court, considered overall on the materials placed, is just and reasonable that the view taken by the
18
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
trial court is on proper appreciation of the materials, the High Court cannot interfere with the acquittal on the ground that another view is possible.
19
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
20
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
about Rs.4 Lakhs by A-1 towards purchase of lands. In this regard, it is the deposition of P.W.1 that he pledged about 14 sovereigns of the jewels of the deceased and obtained Rs.2,20,000/- and adding Rs.30,000/- to it, he gave a sum of Rs.2.50 Lakhs to the deceased to be given to A-1. In this regard, it is to be
noted that if really the respondents had demanded dowry from the parents of the deceased, they would definitely have not parted with the jewels, which were given to the deceased at the time of marriage for the purpose of realising the amount, which was demanded of the deceased. The act of the respondents in allowing P.W.1 to pledge the jewels and obtain the money and receiving it would only denote that the respondents have taken the help of P.W.1 for pledging the jewels and realising the money to be used for the purpose of purchasing the land. When the jewels belong to the deceased, which has been used by her husband/A-1 for the purpose of purchasing land, the act of pledging the jewels and obtaining the money cannot be brought within the dowry demand.
the fact that it is the deposition of P.W.1 in cross that he purchased a land at
21
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
Uthukottai for which about 4 sovereigns of the jewels belonging to the deceased was pledge. When the deceased had given her jewels for pledging to realise money for the purchase of land by her father, P.W.1, definitely, for the purpose of purchase of land by her husband/A-1, the deceased would have voluntarily parted with her jewels for pledging and realising the said money. Therefore, the money, which P.W.1 had given by pledging the jewels of the deceased cannot be said to be money given on account of demand of dowry.
22
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
23
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
it is to be pointed out that the prosecution and the law enforcing agency ought not to act as puppets of the political bigwigs. Therefore, the allegation of dowry demand does not survive consideration as the allegations put forth by the prosecution will not fit in with the demand of dowry and rightly the court below has negatived the contentions, while holding in favour of the accused/respondents herein.
24
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
P.W.5 to P.W.4 has not been spoken to by P.W.5. Therefore, there is no consensus on who had informed about the suicide of the deceased to P.W.1. What is more intriguing with regard to the above depositions is the fact that P.W.6, who is the brother of P.W.5 has deposed that it was A-1 who informed about the death of the deceased to P.W.1. P.W.6 had further deposed that thereafter upon giving the information, A-1 accompanied P.W.6 to the police station to lodge the complaint. The above contradictions in the evidence of P.W.s 1 to 4 when pitted against the evidence of P.W.6, who is an independent witness, clearly establish that the evidence of P.W.s 1 to 4 cannot be trusted in its entirety as there are too many contradictions and embellishments in the said evidence and, therefore, giving a finding against the respondents herein/accused on the basis of the said evidence would be wholly impermissible.
25
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
clearly deposed that there was no quarrel at any point of time between A-1 and the deceased. In fact, it is the specific deposition of P.W.5 that he had never seen the deceased and A-1 fighting with each other and on the other hand, they were leading a happy life. It is the evidence of P.W.6 that during the time when the deceased and A-1 were residing as tenant, there was no fight or quarrel between the deceased and A-1. In the light of the evidence of the independent witnesses directly being in contradiction to the evidence of P.W.s 1 to 4, placing reliance only upon the said evidence of P.W.s 1 to 4, who are interested witnesses, would not be proper.
26
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
recorded at 4.00 a.m. on 17/18.5.2013 and the case was registered on the said
basis.
points of time by the respondents. The two complaints, which have been given by P.W.1 being diametrically opposite to each other, placing reliance on one or the other complaint, in the light of the contradictions pointed out above, would not be in the interest of justice. The two diametrically opposite complaints strike at the substratum of the prosecution case and the allegations, which have been pin pointed in Ex.P-2, could only be termed to be improvements, after discussion between the family members and it cannot form the basis to convict the respondents.
27
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
dowry demand and instigation to commit suicide, there should be clear demand for dowry, which has to be proved in the manner known to law and the instigation of the accused by driving the deceased to end her life should be made out. However, in the case, on hand, it is the specific case of the prosecution that marriage was conducted by the respondents by spending about Rs.8 Lakhs and during marriage, the deceased was given 60 sovereigns of jewels and other stridhana articles. It is not the case of the prosecution that any demand for dowry was made by the accused at the time of the marriage. Such being the case, a duty is cast on the prosecution to establish the demand of dowry by the accused. Equally, the instigation of the accused on the deceased to commit suicide has also not been proved, as even according to the prosecution, A-1 and the deceased were not within the joint family, but leading a separate life. Such being the case, no material has been placed by the prosecution to show that there was instigation by the other accused on the deceased, which drove her to
commit suicide.
28
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
below, by placing reliance on the ratio of the Apex Court with regard to the offences u/s 498 (A), 306 and 304 (II) and the said decision being just, reasonable and based on proper appreciation of the evidence available on record, the acquittal of the respondents recorded by the trial court does not require any interference at the hands of this Court.
05.09.2024
Index : Yes / No
GLN
To
29
Tiruvallur.
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
30
____________ CRL. A. No.322/2021
M.DHANDAPANI, J.
GLN
PRE-DELIVERY JUDGMENT IN CRL. A. NO.322 OF 2021
Pronounced on
31
CRL. A. No.322/2021
05.09.2024
32
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellate court could reverse the trial court's acquittal of the accused charged under Sections 498(A), 304(B) and 306 IPC for the suicide of the wife within seven years of marriage.
Whether the evidence established dowry demand and instigation driving the deceased to commit suicide.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar & Ors. v. State of KarnatakaRelied on¶28
(C.A. No.985/2010 – Date – 19.04.2024)
Rajesh Prasad v. State of Bihar and Anr.Relied on¶28
(2022 (3) SCC 471) · Who else cites this
Chandrappa v. State of KarnatakaReferred¶28
(2007) 4 SCC 415 · Who else cites this
H.D. Sundara & Ors. v. State of KarnatakaRelied on¶28
(2023 (9) SCC 581) · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 1 enactments
S.Umapathy
D.Ramesh @ Boopathy
D.Ramamurthy Dilli (Died)
R.Bhuvaneshwari
The State, rep. by its Inspector of Police, Ambattur Police Station, Tiruvallur District
M.Dhandapani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
