High Court Karnataka High Court

State By Krishnaraja Police vs Devaraju on 24 March, 2008

Karnataka High Court
State By Krishnaraja Police vs Devaraju on 24 March, 2008
Author: V.Jagannathan
11: THE I-IIGI-I mm or- 1et" "'.§."-.V.:"_' M
Aged about 5'53. .. ' -

 %    '

mu  

 shut'  '

!E-'3

% %  % mir1««:«zé:es.:223s. -wt: Main Road,
   Kw,

r 'III -I 4
...1-mupnnuenuu

' 1'   ..[ B3;  Kumar. Adwcateior R-1 a. R-3. J


I.'

I .I,,,,,,,,,,___I £14.! __I__ n_._..._'_.___._.

l
'3

-..P.B.  'u'; grant 'aava it.-: % an -1%. .-agai.-.-at
.d.t.11_-- (.1 -J-

iur1iun19.rng'r\}ni"ad Q91-rzrn-2 nnnned bu». "the; I
........... ..,.. ..--.. ,_.._,.. __ _

Jum 

in

Sr-,D:L},I & C~.-1.1.!!!-, Myuora, in C.C.No. 66'?'7,I199-'5

'VVZ ..

.a¢z:;uitting the mapondanrm-amused for the offenms

--'

 

 efimflWmT



I?

 '.::Va1-"var fif 9&1, 113% ts ya

2

punishable: under Seam.-ions 498--A. 323. 506 mad with 34
cf the I.P.C.

'unis am:-ca; mmfg: rm mf Iluurillg, u * '*7', tiiaa

judgtm-nt cnf acquittal panned    of V'

the: mapurflam  ~-- under
Sectiarm -W8»-A, 323, sostyead   I.P.C.
3.. Th: cagst:   is to the efleot

*1.

..!,"l £3.-;~ ".§'t.'$.;1E'.!.1"~'?V*fi-1.; to. b.ar9..ea

J1 J. I 'I. ..-r«g- 4:

1

1.]. an

mm" ' the dam mt int and was aha inrmrmg' ' 'war by

  AAV""'**a«"attt'actiun1y and even to go for

  further case of the proaecufinn that

  the »c-that two respondents, the mother

2

‘e *.:-aa*’*-“…….t m .*….e

E

and used to wold it ‘
‘ an 3.11.1994 at about 9.00 11,111., when the

‘ was in laser house: along with her brothers, 9:

¥nvt:.fl_u1gm1;1gg1;:5dhare1dgmhmthermgoast11efafl1m’of

…—J

9.,
/.

‘I

z::u1’x:1″‘T’T”‘*”::Ifi3.r Ch];:iem.a”‘”C:’I. mm””””‘ sum’ firhafi ‘t.neL’

1:3!’-0-tl’1(%1″3 mm: nut, A-1 is said to have:
bmrmm ar the complainant ::I1 <'i'.lmi1f Vimi °

gillshflzl their heada inwards

Id .

“E
I
i

I-BI-Eh!

………. .. ….. ….,….,,,….._.-
he WW5: aim aaaauiied on the
wall and apex’: frarn mother
rt:-amc, she s.vang« é%§s-::u ,V and thus, the
wntpfinhirxt % k%.q,-1 assaulted the

U’T.J’ll.lfo”Jln”ih.ll§J11.II.l;I1..i’..liv-1’11|;2I.’i.’V HJLFLJ,’ D an W 1. u..: uu. um

ahavee 333$.’ the assault, A-1 aim:

that was lodged on 23.11.1994

Ho. 382.1199′? and, after completion of

V’ iW*.é which .5;-I._……r=1′-Ir?|«-=fl. r-a-r.~r_=rzi_1.’I_mr gt’ t1′-._n

” manta ‘of the G°–Inp’ia1’na a—-n——–u–” “n—-ar—- — a—-n——u–” “n–er–

as well as conducting aizure mahazn: 131.13-B and

getting the: wound cartiflcates E:m.P-5 to 13-?’ from the

}/

an

1’1-I-Ar-.r-..~.~v’1I-\ I-w-vxfl-nu-m Ar he nnnrrn ‘ nicn ‘Pin 3:: V’

‘F

U 1……£:……_, st… ..%……_…n.. …_….t…
£.I$.|.IJ.l’.’!.”-‘ LIJM1 l.«IJ|JJ.”l. ‘IV l.l..LLl-U-PW-l.l.l.

dmnnr P.W.1C.’|, clmrgwskwmt was submitted ayinst the

4.. ‘Mae mzcunmi pleaded mat _;[_L1ilty tn the _

M.nnAn,_,..n.11-=.n.4-n ‘B-TIT… 1 -ha. ‘I1 non-I .1-u-._.p.,_-Q
Jul 54$?-.I¢I-IL.-nfl\.’| I”u’I’l’iIuJ. IJIJ -LL ‘$1.15-I. V

dmummm E:rm.P-1 to P-9 in mppmttgr it-at

stand :21’ the. accused was ‘ex

Ea;-an D1 ‘ ..

al 1nnrm1;uea’ ” and may”

beu1g’ _. t1tesvvV:3cr1t1p!g..ifi1:~.»ith:q§*éIf.’~iIran lodged afiaer hung delay

mam’ ‘ {trim vzicgrufit ‘sf uzmnplaint allngaflnna and

witzmamaxs P.Ws.1 and 2 in 5

,’F’.’i5&.’.fl’l-I>vlI.!qAV”‘_l’l*-~’ i’#i+’fi-fl.A;d!”nflJJ . A an __ .
‘I’l”mM.\JP- U.-.’v’ KID’ J.l.I-I-JoAI.\.I’I3!rIJ’|II. flullhl WLUHU £\d.KKhI-UNI”

no witneas, thnugh praaent,
“L and A-1 aha lodged complaint against the
party on the very same day with the police.

mu-urt also found that the teati1nor1;.’ of P.W.1 wen

….__…..’I….’._¢ -…._ ..

..I.!.fl…………n. £…_…… 41…… 1..
I-{K2111 I-11¢ ‘..ilJl-Iii}-I-.l..I-IL YE nus.

with:-egardtndemm1dofdowryamlharaaamecr1ti11t11at
%’

1.} A -i-1…”. _
I..u.I:: V.

an1’mm:.*tinn mud it also found no cormboratinn ‘
*.-:;-.;.**..1*.mM::}r 91′ ?”?12 M 5 when mm te

I’I’Il’I I-PI’

1mm::nun3r” . Tm-:1ng” n::ateui’ai11;t1-use” mnrm1t1e.u’ ”

proeemxtion case. the trial mutt did not find it: A

an flu it1’tB1’eS’hBI.’l testinuny of P.Wu;i -ta’ ‘

mt acmapt tlm pmsacution case

‘my-and :31! z-aaararabia &=.*.z”..=’.t..__ ‘.-.-‘3.-5

acquittad ma: the ofmegg with
manned” by the acqtxittfl appeal has

fi.. I Pleadar for the
smug and the learned coutlaul

rt 12-: mg R-3% H-2 on-1; an

s.-…….. 19.. .. _. -. ….r ._._..g

oi””%1*1ig____;1§::peai uni hence, the case

‘”f.. “5FI'”‘!rass-,__v’:”.1V;’l::11I1a:”A ” ion 0f the 1ear:1sacl.’ ‘ Cioxaa-rz1msani: Fwaaar’

%tm”:an§.m 113 that the trial court was in -Mror in not

the tuaetinmny of P.Wus.1 to 5 insofar as the

_ “am§auBt. oamittnd by A-1 on these witneazem E aonceemad.

I-I XWI-I-I-$1

J.-ll I-.lJ-DH w’ W I’ I-IIl’I’§Ill.l-lufilullu. IKXIIIEEI $

mes thruugh the teatitmny of the material witnesses anci

J’:

‘R

ggumi ting: Lhmnlze triA.;l not fin

ni’ ti:-E: fiifiaaafi which in: E”iIIpoI”””w:1’f_’ ‘fly

the medical evidmruza of P.’W.1D.

8.. Fast far as that: inlay in ‘V

d, the submission madafigis

bwn pmpm-1y explained by P;VW._} t..1v’1e– ‘

trial murt was at fhultjn of

mrurt fines with regard
tn the: Comaquecntly, the
nflanma gas the: mo. aha has been

:18′ 3;.v1’i£Ii}”J. 1 é¢1;i’i-hmam.fipyIu;mt’ “.u J. uvidwwu “‘u:’y ‘:’l” ‘u””’

_ learned has
on remrd. Hence. the learned

‘ V for the State prayed for c:o11vu’:1:n’ ‘ n of

h.a_t_u:i;_,1:1.’;c:: laagzmci mtmggl for the

.11 ‘ J ..I_,__. ._.l’

4I’%Il3Ifififlm&fgU.$3.fi1fiiEflBTE1§-EflB.lB.)i’DI2’L’lflflyfi511

lodging the complaint and ‘dais delay has not been properly

JV

\-I

befhm the cuurt in support of her compiaint

and there ia no ncnmtion of demand 0:? A

FEs.4~5,0E3f§IJ’- by flue accused V’

1’1_L.i_.rt_lJ;y, 1i1:;:L1.,g,11 ware

..:l.._.. _.11_____1 .._’ _ _.

pi”-merit iirhéfi Ina euaugau the V

prmawfinn has of tho
mder1,mn’ ‘mule-nt w1d:n1aa'” am. “I$31.e1w.-fa’ to rely can

the fintexmtued V. to convict the

agaicnst the oumpinimnfa

was taken in respect of the said

f”urthe.r subazms” sian made is that the

to atay away her huahanrl

V -._ .L.. -1.._ _._…._. 1-…..__-…._ 1…- 1..-._1.._._ ……. _….. .. ………………
vflzmai. 1.; w” mruu m:=ru.u:am:u;ii’Ls’i E pun-I: E

am that ths mmplainant can live with heat’ huahand

and mm; with her in-lawn and because nf than mefixsal

affl-1.t::-this demand ofttmoanrplairmnn a oaaehas boon

med afinreaaid. I-Ie:r1c:o,the

mt:-7.:a*..-a%.4. 3%’-‘….5t t…e a

1ziawm.”icenbytImt1iaieauficwm’cnfia”idtabaawa$ib.’e

View from the evidence on record and, as

«ermn: is callad for againat tlms order

glawaaafli by the trial court.

11. In the mm of the aubt.*iisi3_jfor1fii*-ntfjxsarle 1:4i1e: .

far c:c:rm;idnara1:inn__ is was

ju,ai:i1″1zi=e:i atrquittiifig :,m.–?%…A.b;;.%.«.,,_..-1 …r;d __ ,1 of

2.
3 _

all the affiaxwas Wifi’1__wh5_fiH E¢’.§’§§i.§3h.l”fl6u:,,..V’ 3 ” ‘.

it is, nwt§eaa_afy”Tv5ip Ti _ .– power of tile fippeilaia

Court. and the Apex Court’

k nhae;#gIui;io.ns’.Vim~;_A %¢a§%¢ :31′ Ana Kumar Va. sum of

1″.3’B} worth ra::a% at this

I

1

above aaici jufigmafit, % Afl C¢u.. .. 1.19:5

‘A in ma embargo on an appellate court

V’ ‘ –r::&i.riaawi1t1g the: en.-idmxse upon which an order of
arrquittal ia” baaad. Genemally. the order of
au:::q1.111:ta’ lahaflnntbemterfer-ad’ ‘ ‘ wi1:h ‘bac:ause1:’iie

prmumptinn of immoemze of % ra.r;u7;usa”u is

fuufiwr a fi& ‘:73; a~”.1it*..al. ‘!.”.’.:-..; g9H._…n1’1

R _
2′

tltmead which mm thra-ugh the web of
adminiaimtion ofjustioe: in oritninal cams is that__
.if1Lwo vksws are possible an the evidenote
in tha case, one: pointim to the guilt .
a.-m:msvafi and the other 1:: his inJ:1m:a11c:e,

which is favourable to the I
aduptnd. the paramount of

court ii: to ensure that of

u§~hm~. E1_I:Lfl,$_i_II_3lI.!:.3 ¢_1,-.y 5
{met uwn the
aeqtlitted.

for m whethar any
0f the any ofience or
mast. Emu-. of M.P. (2002)
4 Is5;% gamma (cRL.) 735: (20052) 2
am princsiple to be followed by
court consitiesring the appeal

L:1::’5.’*.§’i.””””””1’t”. (if at in 11′: 2lI1l.£1l’l£fif€I
‘VJ

zmenaaa-c_’I’V-st for clans: go. Ifth imu mud ‘

_ ..G__..

I I uxumnnabla and relevant and

I
4’…’
I
I
I
I
I
I

materials have been unjustifiably

ee1in1ira.n1:ad in the pzuzess, it is a compellirlg
x-amison for “.

13. The trial Court has ax:q1.1itted the rmpondant-aoouuod

2x

B

11)

ad Esngerfl gang; bv trial Court for

, I ,

4. 451.- …….._……A.2-..

at tfrfi flflfiéliifiiifi. Dfiifiilfs um prua»v:t_=!;uDI1

the camplairamlt and her brothers

eatabl?m1’1 the case agaimt the accused in

asaaulit mmznittmi by the amused 4: ‘V

are :-.r.,-. 111.: t…..*imn_n},r -1’ 1- _ ..,._.

ii

* at ”

.m not i.nnpam’ mmmame ‘A ._bf:’.’1.v’:.:1a’* * in A

awept. tzha aamaa far aha
fizruntl that the :awja% 5 diaclnua

impwunmemt fiéu1fi1;w.iitB.g,§3 to V’ of the material

d-slay in {f m imiepenxhrzt witnesn

was tautinnny of the clone

at i:’41″3sa -:f~;c~iiv11:n1’Vt.~.i1A1…’n.;’.a.11t and all tlmse led the trial

on record with uun_n:x::1n’ ‘ I1 and

…………….. – …a
Lu u: I.» pnJav.7.:u”‘ “‘

.”_=. n. 1 n–_…… ‘l.._’!.’l …1…..a. .. r..n…:|
I Jul 1%.” lll..l..fifi|.l.

uouru

‘ _1:a beyond all reasonable doubt. It in on

hr the mid view. the and Court acquitted the

Hnvmg regard to the position in law as has been

J “11.-:é..Ji-.+.i. 1:23,-r Alt:-=n:..a: €.’im.I.rI.: :11 mg abov: mgzxgtzuhfi mag wlmgt

;1_.___ ‘..’ I”_..__A.

K461-11″

in-ta’imsaaniawhaihariheviawtaxun”‘*~’rTyum””mu

mnh¢saidtobaapoaa1b1eviewemm’glngfi’omtl1e
I’ .

Jr

V v

II

..-ldm’m.;u-.3r;-3.1!. 1′:-;ur.’=.nr.,r.I.’t:’|. ;-1.I..r.Id. i£a:.II.!w_rt;-.14 in flag: afirlna ‘ua. than

mu… _ _–. __ ._..____. – _’ j_._._..

I.__ __

irzterfmratsnoe by this fiourt ‘m: not for new

armttna-I vixaw is also possible. It in with the ahaifg

that the: evridenos on rword will have to: be “‘ ” = H ”

14. T113 charge against the

marrjflfla P.W.1 an

human-vs her in cmmacfion} that and in

4» Ir. ‘ ” ‘ .

** ~*”” stat.-11 ‘aha m”*-.uf.:}a=..£%«”;. *;*.:’.’s-..-s_*.3:–3’….*…..’*” m”……,=-‘1-= bath

pays’ imanlijr and at about -:-“ma
A..M., um house of the
with her brothers and

a..H-an M4 c.w.s!, c.w.3, c.w.4,

thus, the accused persona

ioflfienne punimable under Section: «+93-A,

.-Em-:1 is aat.-e,-5. 23.11.1994. M i ‘A t. 1.

a23,%%&md sé5 the IPC. The complaint in marked as

ulna”:

in ta: have tame’ 11 paw’ a.c::nru.1ng” to the

itxwlf on 3.11.1994{wrongly xnentioned an
_: .”3..11.l’SP§|5 in the charge franud by the trial Court).

‘lhmfifiare, the first infirmity which appears at that
9’-l_.–‘

«’1’.

I2

‘l_:1-%_ug;1,m ~H’__g__f in _’_11’1_:r_1____i1’|n1’n d1a’i.I’ ‘i ]_t_1da’ina gf the
“”””””‘” ‘- ‘I’——

3
I
J
I
I

_-… I ‘I… ‘I…..! .._..

aompfimint. There is a delay of aifnoat 20 “yrs 1:1 nma:II1g*.__ ‘

the cumplaint. As per the FIR, the place cf

about. 1 Km. from K.R.Pb]1’sce station, Mysore.

dexlfi)’ has beer: flxphined by the? V

is a iyped’ co1npi.a.initV:V:’1*s1nnJIIg’ V , V’

mm. ist ahaohxtely no m¢mn’%¢:;ag%¢ehy ‘ the
c£m1p1m’11t. p.w.1 who um’ the wife of
first menu: h£§4”.d5P®~§d%1i%i that afbur the

-mm-“””fi was mfia ‘m

E
E
E
G
E
.« E
gi
Kr!

5.:


bung" aa1'ra:cv>u.tv    tlm parties and as

thaw.    the comp1a1:nt' . This

   1:_h_e_:     of

_----':u.--......._

.|_...._.'I

8§ififl_1_’E”E”fli” is mt fafihmflfifif, if; the dc:-.tai’Lae’u Lypuu

as per EILP1 that we after 20 duyn nfier

anaideuit. Thus promuuon has also examined P.W.8

who did conduct the initial iI1vm1:Tgatinn.]ikB

~ the “ma; ae:.’~.¢.ii.:.’=.,-gr, FIR tn; t.11_.a. f_’.m.1_rt 13.4 ,t.n::r ELF?

anti mncimztfirng spot umhamr as per Emfi on .-‘3-.1″‘&.1§”‘-.-:-‘r

and thin witnma. in the czourae of his gross-axanflnafinn

fir

13

an |:II’rua1’I,:,nrl % at 1: .r-I-“u-I uni r-n1-u-11-u–1- rnr -:ru-I.rIIn*I-‘:flaI-‘;rI.I1 n ‘I!
‘J1-‘5 IH’\.H-Ivlulfi-I I-Infill.’ -IILJ I-I-Ilul 4IiDFI- I-OIIIIEI-InIWd’Io_IlrIuD’ v$ocI-VIIIIWQ-wfijuflvln Ufilfflfillh

rim ::m.1ae for the daisy in imaging the complaint

ha dams mt know as m where and how the

typed and by whom. Thus, the wrplanaticn K

mt um’-»._; aatiafim:’I:o:-y and it is

“JR fii want 1.! fie nu:-my w1u;u.;u. en. mum

.s….1.. _.1._ – 1…….’n… ……:.n…1…. ‘… *.I.x’I……..fi’a..-;..’…”‘

pz:n].1ce’ vr-stat1′.~::11, yet no c:omp1um’ bdm V

paint ant” time. ‘I’h’a about
the pwaemztinn mm the View that

war

1.11.: . .g’_.pl.si1′:a,n_i:’a $.19:-avmpafle amp: to an

w’m.Ie’ . amuse by ‘ imam %c.-.:mp~ { ~
11 5 ‘ =_ gala-rfinrvt ‘m*’iH1 nlurnv-r1 ‘I11 {Fun
In I ‘Id-Jbln-lI’.lnfi.d’J’-‘ ‘ ,.V . V ._ t “7551. _w’$ 1′ -Qj

mmpia.h1t ii. in the etricieusnee of F.’\ii.1

imkient, she went to the police

ledge: any complaint and says that the

»’ IJo.J.\.IJ.l!IIUlLH.JL’|.E’..H’l.l LURE

tn cn11::e on 18.11.1994. P.W.2

plum-un.aa…n.-3 Eu-I. ‘ AMI

-II-I IL” UVALMJUJV Iluluifl-ll WIWII-«Ia Kim!”

«I

” , he so.-nmpanm’ d by ‘P.W.1, 1=’.w.4 anti F’.T£7.5,

” um um poflco station and mgr also found All Devaraj

prawn tl.’1ere and tha said. had been sent to

11;: pm; t1r1_e pause, RW53 Ggurzggl; ix; thlil of

W

‘J

L
D’

’14

‘1 -I , , . .,, i ,..1, . n 1-: Ann; ¢L_ ___11__ __’I_.L__’_+__j
GV1’Z1BII1′..’v’3 REE E-IuE1’l’.fl3I. HIRE D11 u.’.’l…L.l..J..H5’1′,. U16 IJDIJIJE3 (JlZl’llE.1I’§.l.

the wmplaint from P.W.1 and tlwrx amt the

hnapital for tceatlnant. P.W.-4 Hagarqj says in

that won a1’tm’ the £1′:-aiatleant, his bmthuar _

Han g__1_*1rl Han» ‘I’ 5|}

Icahn’-II ‘ll’IIil’ an-is _r-W…-..n.w –Ivan-u –n -¢fi ::L:’—uowf-n ‘up–v

i
3;

5

% E
3
“<2
:3'

treatment. Pfi'iF.5 fiharada 3.139 says aeéri

.-

10. Thus, we: we on

3.11. 11994, P.W.J1.é’L11d othmu: station and

lodged the is not fiarth

f:’u’::’:’.t1L praamutian and no
.._.__.1..__. .. M . VM h 1….- ‘ft.

V’, ‘- ,’ ~. Z ‘
£u],uunJu?i’fliE.a1″£i is “mu

said mmpmxg mm-arm. it is clifiicult to view the

,f V’c::pm1;i1i£i:h1;T,:Ex:F1AA fimt complaint lodged with 1:11:

afinr the im-idtmt. The fact that injured

L: théé a.1nt._n;._.I.:r_I:1.. an t1_IL.: 3352::-tr mama d_n_13r is 44159

———-J — – _._

.. ….R._ ..’I __

rhc fifidcfzcfifi faf the fiiiauunou as

‘ Razifmlcrm. ‘ hna. Suit who has stated in his evade’ nae

% um :m1.1=.=:94 PC1472 brought somaaheldur, Ganevah

é Raga:-aaj far traaunent with. the history of assault.

1:933. Tifiiifl 1:|.-ran, Flnfl 1” 11′!’ him All 1:: A ff ,
‘III I-LI-‘Milo! ululfl-I-‘IA 1′ V’ -I ‘In

H ‘7’? ‘I 35*!’ Itolui ul-‘If III-I-2§IJlIu$FI’nIn§ V!

S)»,
c/..

A 1 an-In. 4-In Malina.

Liam -*’1HLl. M43 LU l..l.’.r1l.~ .i.lJI.fl.-Md J.’uvUl.\uI. a|.|.u.-I. who

5′

mad’ A tau: be the mmpinfilt aurfafi aim. the daisy afahnou it

243* days and though flilfi said complaint in

Wm’ ‘ all the «mm right “L by

Pawal

‘r .u;~…V””.’1;;1;”.-. .-
_J_i.|: – nun:

seaaéri rifnmplaiii’ ‘W flria “‘f;”*=7si*” “f::ar.’i’l”

ludgingthcsoomplaint. %

I’

__ J.

17′. Tm sttapicign Ixidiring fif
by was by the prosecution

‘- I – I I u
.u.m.1.u.. In 15311 13 3.» t-I-D«4L’u| ‘.13 .I..::~.r””‘ “‘:x.’u’33.”;*’u-5-‘:'”1′.’: a1′,r”.’.’..u..-..””u*”*

that the accused pa:-non:

Ra.45,0D0l-. Therefore, the testimony

uf the Court w1th’ yd to demand of

‘:1._ya-wrgru :_:f:’ti:1g:sv in that oannwtion, aoaumed

.n.__.._.._…..n. .f_’I’I_. I.._ d..’I……. _…_.u…………1 1…-.._…—nun.-g u.-nu
u 1- I

. “””iL’L””””‘?t’ie*Ii” ii}. “Li”1′:’:I”i. 11:111. mun IJEJ um mu DI-‘a’|.ifl.I.l.|’.lIE

«mmplauu-‘ . Ex.Pl, she not only omits to males’ 3.

.”menti.an ntnf dennand of dowry mzununt but on the other

hand,gim-asaemnohi1t.batl1eamusedbyatatir1gi11th¢

L

I

IQ

‘J ‘A

1:6

that the accused pal-arms did not Imus: for

.5

Ci-fifiiI’*”1′”j_’?f defiiaiid ‘r.T”x’. -:-fl fix: 6-t’c”” }””id. atafoa t1*”*t thfifir’. i’

F

1:: am» m1nplain.a11t.’a family to parfiarm the

they crkaaired and thus a totally ainrmm 1

-‘–‘w

$3.1;-.inta”4a’—…r3,a=~.1*i.-‘-,m. I i 1m

II-up!!!-‘Una-I’ll’ –

trm’ t aha waver rmraah ii. in ‘ner Véihfifit u:|a'”” V

amuam dc-mamiing by
the p1-n1ae¢:m1tin11 i.g., the dowry
dnmanded and ulznecrwd that
tietrnaxxcieaci by the.

accused haraelf says in 1191- avidence

that 3351-sv anyom of her family numbers

nfmw _, by the acclmad.

1-3.} A case of tha prmsecutjnn flmt all the

fiezfl-om .2-;_nn:_a.1.:1.:::d F113,; ha: mambecra

1″ .1fi%, pi: tr: :ax?;c;’a.::5Ea1’1. 36.1, all ‘t;”‘a

V. —1.1 @I’4V§Iia¢.’-»s::1.;Ltic::-11 witnnwe.-3 who are the close relatives of P.W.1

not speak anything about A2 and A3. Axxxarding to

matarfial witnssawa far the pmaacrutrlon, thus: mnthuaw of the

j;’,/

r”

I7

cnmpfluinmalmsaidmohavaba-axlaasatllhadbyflle

I
amua-a;-d. ‘l’l’:.$ aw.-1″. pa:’a…~n r-1:: L’~…n”.,,,……….-=r-=-1′-*-‘*’=* …..u

D
I
I’?

(‘I
am-

I’

bsen eum.max1en:i” ‘ by the prosecution for the

lens:-wn ta it. Except P.W.6 Rajanna.

wnusm-” was are all close relatives -‘P’.*W.«1

goxmbmratc cash other even

.1 ……_..-…..:l …..’..,

_1_.._._._ 1… V’ ,_ .’._.._.*.

5%.

___.. .’_”___ ….l”
I.

_’III .

I3. ‘B3131. I32’

mid wimmsw barting.I-‘.1?_i.l’.~~di5 ‘ T in
th:a1r’ mm, ‘ with regard’ ‘ f1*;£a’V:’ f long delay
in lndging the jun: has aha found

1:11 f 11% m-Ii gt.-rI.a.n

noun a-n¢un-s–u . rv -I~IIIn.nIrw–u—t

41.. ..

raga:rd tit?» aéaaniit” acéfiaed rm eaah one ai’ um

W

~. 1?. in aid to have been uc.c:u.t-reti an

baa am: fmm the evid-ems of the

nwI::ee’ * k , them has been inordinaw delay marl

spot mahazar whiz’-h amcrrdim to P.W.8 was

..1 _¢.«I_-E .«….. :1 nru .. ………
” |l.ia'”‘-I-«I LI’: “nil-Elli!”

” …_”V’:.’ata5t?.:exu:en1as mm wimcasm have been recorded by F.W.11

V V ‘ -. fake after om month.

\ –

‘P7

ir1bareat.ad tastnuu” 113; :1? PIN. 1 aJ:1d her brothers’

and anutlmr relative P.W.5. Thea: wilrnesa-aw dd:

tzaxmiratxanfly avail with regard to 6:: ‘V

” ” “‘»-n’

w ml: ptflmtsn wag aamultgd

hr by accused ‘1’~¢’o.i.”‘-«,I’1′;~,is (if fifih V

midmm-. can reward. th«afnfi_a1 ._r1n1:t aafi: to

W ?.”_ If’: but i;”:ua complaint
wrsixm figybyfl by the mmpla1nan’ t

the Court. It is therefioro.

«tnnv _’ 1 (:.mu~r. fbund it unsafe to accept

. ‘V’ V’ N’ 2 >V ‘V7 . . I
n vna+-ma-ca’ txnfannaaea an my 3%?

‘ ‘ = the. case: beta” re the Court when’

,,__ Ltn their statnment hefura the polioe but than

and her people took auifixzient time in order to

‘T to the taaneand it is also mrident from the very

_……._._…..:, .’. 1…..:_’I.. .–.. ‘In:-It ‘lam.-I Luau balm-nu’ aid!’ J-“Inst

‘u. fifiz FINAL uI:u..I. |..n:u.u.

21. In t.1:1..l% m”:…;.-I.:_I..n. it I; t mamjnngd m 1:119

delay in lodging the -rxzrnpiaint poiice ia a–.f'”‘r5a1

infirmityr in the pcmaecutian case ar1d

oaxrzpkauitmmt. and her family rnmmubere went

utatinxi an the vary warm: day and V

-nan ‘I”IuHI.1.’lI” H5131} 3&1!’ in mflflnnnn ‘I’ 9&5!’

xiv; l..I\.I’.M’.l..|. “J .I.I.-I. vluuvnnvvp vvg.a,_1-

lodged’ ‘ on 3.11.1994 is ‘awn: nat

eatplaixieci by the proaeofiflgn. to be
muntiaruarl rm-. the aa1ayL is an
amount of and he give a
refizzr tut: of fiajan Vs. State of

‘I’an111’ fia: iu, CRIMES 756, and the said

Lb: Law anon
is uf ;_:ua1’an1nLu1t i3:nportaJ:1x:e
case. It will be a vital and

.V piano: of evidence to corroborate the.
x :._!I_’JI”aV1 .E%iP1d¢ifl¢& to be adduced during the trial.
” subject of insisting upon a prompt lodging of
the mport in to obtain early information not

::nr11y Iwdingtimaanaaiianbs irutaino about the
partp1ayedbj.rth:aaccunaci,ti1anatL1reofihe

ir’1c:i::ixmi: thfi at-‘ai’nfi’n”i1i'”‘ fif “rv’i’::ri?uafi. 1?’

Q.

-/..

30

£1,133′ i_11 lodug,i.mg t_h_a=_: .fi_rg1.:
_u1txa- acrftaan rmulta in confabulatinn and danger
zxrmgna in flue possibility of a coloured

after dnlibe.-raticn and eonaulation. It will
u1’bL:rly umafia to base a camnbtion upoati. M

ewicimxce, when the law was .m:t._§:t
swan after the im:id»er1t, ‘uut.__wgBT .. AA

cnaar 14 -days, though am

2:. Wm laarnnd also

…… .,………. a_n_d

they am w mflnaij

291. 183. AIR 1975 so

19529 2435 and AIR 1933
SCAM” . ‘. ‘ ,

.’ to the law laid down by the Apex

cams r-sfiezrmd In by the learned

rw……A…..V…1 .r_..- ‘ …….. ……I
I.-uuIL=ugu1_m=1_’L’,;1u 1 ‘fififlu 3.” $314 una V91: aaawn

1|-‘mg; tnmunnz nnnaaia

‘ cam itself is I} in carious doubt not arfly

-:31′ long delay in lodging this complaint. but

” E .L _
T ‘ an-“xztpluaaint version also being not adhere}: by P.W.1 111 the

“‘ ea:m1_z._rg«;= rzf hex: with to the demand for

dowry; the ‘by the “trial Cc:i.i.r””t ‘un::um'”””‘-Fa s..u;'”-“”;1″‘t.

(\

it.’

he :___}:1-_ tamer Lang Lug

……. ._’…… _…

.. .. .1 J. .. 11 1-1..

1’___’I_;_. 1__A __..1:v_..
uuugc I133 I’|.’.f~[BI’

analymg the tnaatimnny ufamh at’ the
has u::a:>mi-siecmd an impact cf the dalay in

oumlcrlairxt cm. the ‘humanity of .of

:n~i’~lna,m,saAn m.–nu-‘l nu: n11:-u.
“I.IIC-§.QTF-FKQW ‘NJ-slflflo URI! I-IIHn”In’&C’ I-Alli! VHFEIJJ-Nu”

if:-aurt with the uantzirwa V

raiacs a reaaonable sus;§iaion_~’a’Ey§iit case,
am it :’:.a.nr1z:It bu mid _ ‘ , but on
ma c-th-er ma, mgma% the trial Ca-urt

ii. a 1t}”**a’, fi”a €u an r-“mm-5.. uk-

such , memigr _V-wfiavoaaibio to mice” another

mew” af ‘ “‘::’1” that Itself’ will not give scope

for Couft. with the ardent of auqu1t:t.a1′

Qf mg mg 1a_.a’g down. by t_h1_a Apgzg

……_. _………’l …- -1…

nn ..;’-:3 ‘Br… …I… .. __ .._.E .n._ …..
111 (73.55 FUICHTQKI L0 515 H.FK3VUu

reauoné, the appeal is liable to he

% it is dismiaacad.

01:10!-

I in’

‘has ru-n-m