{"id":141446,"date":"2010-07-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-07-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010"},"modified":"2019-02-22T10:15:45","modified_gmt":"2019-02-22T04:45:45","slug":"manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010","title":{"rendered":"Manjegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 16 July, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Manjegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 16 July, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: K.N.Keshavanarayana<\/div>\n
INTEHEHHHICOURTCH?KARNATAKAJMPBANGALORE\nDATED THIS THE 16\"' DAY OF JULY 201(V)_.-.___\n\nBEFORE\n\nTHE HON'BLE am JUSTICE K N  K  \n\nCRIMINAL APPEAL No. :39 or i26.rI;%I}..(C)'   \u00e9  T\n\nBETWEEN:\n\nI. MANJEGOWDA,   ' \nS\/O. LATE SANi\\iEC\u00a7Q\\R?D1_\u00a7, \" '\nAGED 30 YEARS. ' I * \n\n2. SMT. GQWRAMIVIA,  \n\nW\/O. \u00ab14}\\xTE;TiTS\u00a3grJIVIEC:OW)$:;lI,V \"  \" \nAGEE)   _  \n\nf3.0T.H  'RESIDIENG AT\nSAE\\\u00a5G.ARA.SE'I'FYHALL1;\nBEITADAPIIRA IIOBLI,\nV _PERIYAI?AT\u00a7\\EA TALUK. ...APPELLANTS\n\n \"  _( B9 A;I.IjI.BI;I\"AGPIVAN, ADVOCATE )\n\nSTATE  KARNATAIIA,\n\n  A BY PERIYAPATNA POLICE,\nI * REPRESENTED BY\n  _STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,\n  HIGH COURT BUILDINGS,\n\"  _ BANGALORE -- 560 001.  RESPONDENT<\/pre>\n
 (BY SR1 B. BALAKRISI-INA, HCGP}<\/p>\n
2<\/span><\/p>\n
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U\/S374 CR.P.C
\nBY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANTS AGAINST THE
\nJUDGMENT DATED 5\/I\/2004.. PASSED BY THE 1
\nADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSORE, IN SZCNO.
\n225\/I999, CONVICTING THE AFFELLANTS\/AC.CU’SED–1
\nAND 3 FOR THE OFFENCE FUNISHABLE..I:_’H:D,ER<\/p>\n
SECTION 3 OF D. P. ACT AND SENTENCING
\nUNDERGO R. 1. FOR 5 YEARS AND TO FAY..jFINEV:’0_F’ Rs,
\n75.000\/–. I.D., EACH TO UNDERGG-S.I.{4FOR*-ONEVYEAR  <\/p>\n
MORE AND CONVICTING THEM FOE 7′}{‘HE”–.O’FFE1\\lCE<\/p>\n
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION A-_OF I)T..P’~.ACT,_'”A1$ID_T
\nSENTENCING THEM TO UNDERGOT-R.’ I. FOR1_S_MO.1?vTHSV:I\u00bb<\/p>\n
AND TO PAY FINE OF RS.”5, GOO\/– EACH[“_:OI:>.. I.D., TO
\nUNDERGO S.I. FOR ONE _MONTH MORE EACH AND
\nCONVICTING THEM I FOR THE –.CFI<*ENCE FUNISHAELE
\nUNDER SECTION 6 OF"'"\u00a3'HE'–D.\u00a7.P. ACTAND SENTENCING
\nTHEM TO UNDERGO S.1'.' FOR 6 –MO'NfjI'E{-S AND TO PAY
\nFINE OF Rs.5.Q0Q\/– }3.ACH~EACH OF THEM TO<\/p>\n
UNDERG'O..FA"'IS.1.'1::_;=FOR'—-. ONEMIVIONTH MORE AND
\nCONV1CTING'5XTFH_EM 'FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE
\nUNDER.'SECTIONII\u00ab4S.S;A_"AND SENTENCING THEM TO
\nUNDERGO R. I.'-FOR 3"YE'ARS AND TO PAY FINE OF RS.
\n3,000\/– EACH OR I';D."~~1EACH TO UNDERGO S.I. FOR 3
\nMONTHIS MOREHAND ALSO CONVICTING THEM FOR THE<\/p>\n
vvI.I.?UNIS'HAIs3LE UNDER SECTION 804-8 OF IFC
\n AND SENTEHCING THEM TO UNDERGO R. I. FOR 7
\nIT' ~IS1..A1.SO ORDERED THAT ALL THE ABOVE<\/p>\n
SENTEN'CIES'j.::SH;ALL RUN CONCURRENTLY WITH EACH<\/p>\n
OTHER.~~ .\n<\/p>\n
z’I’I-ITIS’ CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING<\/p>\n
   THIS DAY. THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:<\/p>\n
J U D3G M E N T
\nThis appeal is by the Accused– Nos.1 and 3 in SC.<\/p>\n
No.225\/99 on the \ufb01le of the First Additional Sessions<\/p>\n
Judge at Mysore and it is directed against the<\/p>\n
of conviction and order of sentence <\/p>\n
convicting the appellants for the <\/p>\n
under Sections 3, 4 and 6_of_ the\u00ab”D_o’w1y Pr’ohi:bitior1’Act’,<\/p>\n
(for short, ‘D.P. Act’) and Sec’tionsV 49s~.Ajahdi’fso4(s) of
\nIPC and sentencing   u1iClf.:i1gi,Afo~.si_rf11i>risonn1ent for<\/p>\n
various periods and aisotoispay  A A 1. ~ <\/p>\n
Q.) _ _A1Pe.i7iyaj3atr1a”\u00abf?olicc \ufb01led charge sheet against
\nthese two others for the offences<\/p>\n
punishable xund_e’r’1Sections 3, 4 and 6 of the DP. Act and<\/p>\n
 ‘V:’Section’s.ig.4f:38.\u00a2A, 30403) r\/W. 34 of IPC . All the accused<\/p>\n
of Sangarasetty Halli village. Accused<\/p>\n
No.2’.  ‘S-ariinegowda is the father of Accused No.1<\/p>\n
[Appellant No.1) and husband of Accused No.8. Accused<\/p>\n
—  his the stepmother of Accused No.1. Accused No.4-<\/p>\n
wLaxmamrna is the daughter of Accused No.2 through<\/p>\n
Accused No.3. The deceased Putta Rekha @ Rekha was
\nthe daughter of PW.1–Sar1nakelegowda. The marriage of
\ndeceased Rekha with Accused No.1 was solemntz\ufb01ed on<\/p>\n
09.05.1997. During the pre–marriage <\/p>\n
Nos. 1 to 3 were present and Accused  V’<\/p>\n
dowry of Rs.1,00,000\/- in cash  gold’ <\/p>\n
However, after mutual discussion, list was-71 ag’reed\u00b0’. {hath<\/p>\n
PW.l should give dowry of   arld 30<\/p>\n
gms. of gold orna1ner;t_s”;~..  PW.ll haid in all
\nRs.70,000\/- in three; _fi11stalm\u00a5ent~s.l”lt’o..l–l”Accused No.2<\/p>\n
towards ‘and. ‘or1lthe…d’ate of the marriage. 30
\ngms. of gold  also given. PW’.I sought” for<\/p>\n
some timle’=f.ob..a1ance of Rs. 10,000\/-. After the<\/p>\n
 the it deceased Rekha started living with the<\/p>\n
7.g’accuse’d.g_’persons in her matrimonial home and for six<\/p>\n
rn’o_nths,_ gtllleyll lived in harmony. Thereafter, the accused<\/p>\n
l<._startedvli1l–treatir1g her to coerce her to bring the balance<\/p>\n
 of Rs. 10,000\/– which had been agreed. l-loxzvcver,<\/p>\n
  Since the parents of the deceased could not arrange for<\/p>\n
the balance amount of Rs.l0,000\/–, the accused startezl<\/p>\n
aw"\n<\/p>\n
5<\/span>
\nsubjecting her to i11–treatment and crueity. About 3 or 4<\/p>\n
days prior to 04.12.1998, the deceased was found<\/p>\n
missing from the matrimonial home. This <\/p>\n
known to the parents of the deceased. On
\nabout 11.00 am., the dead body… of
\nfound in a channel near  <\/p>\n
Thereafter, PW.1, his brothei*i.._(PW’.’2]__  ‘\u00b0went=d’<\/p>\n
near the channel, saw the deadibodygi and “fhE1’\u20ac.\u20aci\u00a7ft\u20acr PW.2
\nlodged a compiaint before’ the  Poiice alleging<\/p>\n
that the deceased  coni.fo.ittve(‘i  suicide in the<\/p>\n
backgrou’ndV.A”cf’ “harassment meted–out to her
\nby  sister–in–1aw. On the basis<\/p>\n
of the said–4..co’mi)iaint,”i\u00a7W.15–Jagade=esh, PS1, registered<\/p>\n
 :\u00a7ito.v34\u00ab,*’199s under Section 174 of Cr.P.C<\/p>\n
  _ the Taluka Executive Magistrate to<\/p>\n
conduct Accordingly, PW.11–1\\\/Iaraia Siddappa.<\/p>\n
 conducted inquest on the dead body on the same day,
\n,,\/.4’_A’r3Co:i’ded the statement of PW. 1, PW.6–Unc1e of PW.1 and<\/p>\n
_g_oi.hers. investigation by PW.1} revealed that the<\/p>\n
deceased had been subjected to cruelty and harassment<\/p>\n
“{8}”\n<\/p>\n
6<\/span>
\nregarding dowry and therefore, he \ufb01led a report to the p-<\/p>\n
olice on 05.12.1998, on the basis of which, the police
\nregistered the case in Crime No.312\/ 1998 for offences<\/p>\n
punishable under Sections 498-91 and 304 (B) of l\u00a7’C.and<\/p>\n
Sections 3, 4 81 8 of the II).P.Act against <\/p>\n
to 4. Thereafter, the dead body was  <\/p>\n
Inortezn examination, which reVeale.dggt,h’ac:t “1 <\/p>\n
the deceased was on account lof asplay\u00e9;iag_ due <\/p>\n
drowning. After investigation;lcharge’  came to be
\n\ufb01led. After the caste-.._zi}r;i’as’l._co;nn1itted~t to the Court of<\/p>\n
S\u20acSSi0I3,S”.’*  .l\u00a7:eVfore.Vg “charges could be framed,
\nAccused “No;2_,”  of the deceased died,<\/p>\n
therefore,’1thle=caselagainst him came to be closed as<\/p>\n
 ,_ab2\u00a7t\u00e9:~dl_._:A(;cusAed’Nos. 1, 3 and 4 pleaded not guilty for<\/p>\n
  Chargesiezveglled against them and claimed to be tried.<\/p>\n
1  3),_f ‘  prosecution to bring home the guilt of the<\/p>\n
J’accgused– “persons for the charges levelled against them.<\/p>\n
e._1’e\u00a7V:ai”i*1’ined PWS. 1 to 17 and relied on documentary<\/p>\n
  wexiridence as per Exs. P1 to P19 as well as Mos. 1 to 10.<\/p>\n
s<\/p>\n
7<\/span><\/p>\n
The defence of the accused was one of total deniai and<\/p>\n
that of false implication.\n<\/p>\n
4) After hearing both sides and on asses’szf1:i’ent_of<\/p>\n
oral as well as documentary evidence, _.A”theA:’p1’earne-ri<\/p>\n
Sessions Judge by the judgment..u\u00bbn.r:1er coim}_icte.d’AV’<\/p>\n
Accused Nos. 1 and 3 for <\/p>\n
acquitted Accused No.4 of  cha1’ges,1eVeIied”against” V<\/p>\n
her. Being aggrieved by thesaid’judgment”ofuconviction<\/p>\n
and order of sentence, _;’Acc1ised__A–Nos_”  and 3 have<\/p>\n
presented this <\/p>\n
 i’ ‘ii  sides and perused the
\nrecords.\n<\/p>\n
  Bhagavan, learned counsei<\/p>\n
 ‘a:ppearing the appellant\/ accused, contended that the<\/p>\n
 appeal with regard to the charge under<\/p>\n
 Secti0.1’is\u00ab:_3.,h4 and 6 of the D.P.Act is perverse, erroneous<\/p>\n
A f”and”*i_11ega.1 inasmuch as the learned Sessions Judge has<\/p>\n
 failed to notice that the evidence on record do not<\/p>\n
.”*<\/p>\n
5\/<\/p>\n
satisfactorily establish that Accused Nos.i and 3 had
\nmade any demand for dowry nor they had accepted
\ndowry in any manner, therefore. the judgment convicting<\/p>\n
the appellants for the offences punishable <\/p>\n
3, 4 and 6 of the DP. Act, cannot be   <\/p>\n
it is liable to be set aside. in thisiegardl;’\u00ab_yit’ii’s ;r1,ir?:ia:eii~<\/p>\n
submission that the Court below hasffailedeto.  A<\/p>\n
in the complaint, which WaslV’V3’lo:\ufb01dged ulpon’etVhe.l’t\u00a7racing of
\ndead body about 3 or &}fteiiV”tl:ieA.date of inissing of
\nthe deceased from  no allegation<\/p>\n
regardi1’1gevdeman’d;~rar1d’=acce’pta1ice of dowry had been
\nmade  this isla..stro’11g”circumstance to disbelieve the<\/p>\n
evidence thisyregar_d;>.– is his further submission that<\/p>\n
agyceordingllllto—-the material witnesses, the alleged<\/p>\n
 c_’_cielIliianfd,_;and..:aeceptance of dowry was only by Accused<\/p>\n
  Accused No.2 had died even before the<\/p>\n
lx__charges’covuld be framed, the Accused Nos. 1 and 3 could<\/p>\n
“:3:”_n.otl””i:1ave been proceeded with for these charges. He<\/p>\n
  further contended that in the absence of any evidence to<\/p>\n
show that Accused Nos.i <3: 3 had demanded and<\/p>\n
9<\/span><\/p>\n
accepted dowry, their mere presence at the time of
\nalleged demand and acceptance of dowry by Accused
\nNo.2 cannot be a ground to saddle them with crirninal<\/p>\n
liability, therefore, the conviction for the<\/p>\n
punishable under Sections 3, 4 and 6 <\/p>\n
against these appellants is illegal  .t_-l’_;v’tj\u00a3.CI”l_V,uu<\/p>\n
it is liable to be set aside.\n<\/p>\n
that, assuming for the  ofargu’me~nt;’ the”<\/p>\n
conviction recorded againS.t””th_’e lappellantis \u00abfor these<\/p>\n
charges is held to be  fine ordered<\/p>\n
by the.lv’learri”ed lJaud’ge~in this regard is highly
\nexcessive,”  to be set aside.\n<\/p>\n
7) u’>–I_nsoflar_ blast  conviction of Accused Nosl<\/p>\n
    thelciiargers under Sections 498–A and 304(8)<\/p>\n
 IPC counsel submitted that. in View of the<\/p>\n
  appellants have already served–out<\/p>\n
li._ppsubsta.nt:jal part of the imprisonment for nearly 61\/2 years<\/p>\n
 ‘against the maximum period of sentence of<\/p>\n
  imprisonment for seven years as ordered by the Court.<\/p>\n
53%<\/p>\n
10<\/span><\/p>\n
below, he would not pursue the ground urged in this
\nregard. Therefore, he sought for allovwing the appeal with
\nregard to the charges under Sections 3 .4 and_.v8l_l:’ofl’t.he<\/p>\n
{).P.ACt.\n<\/p>\n
8) On, the other hand,_gSgri. areeaa1ak\ufb01shr;;{.’*ss <\/p>\n
learned High Court Government Plea.derie\u00bb.app’earingg “for<\/p>\n
the Respondent\/State sought._ to  <\/p>\n
under appeal and contended.that=..the  under
\nappeal do not suffer  or illegality and
\nthat the learned .__Sessioi1s:1JVudgeV.  regard to the<\/p>\n
evidenee on’reeord’.has:reeorded proper findings that the
\nappellants ‘along. No.2 demanded dowry in<\/p>\n
cash;   subsequently accepted the same, as<\/p>\n
  ,.ll:'<1':'l_grr1ent_of conviction passed by the learned<\/p>\n
 against Accused Nos.l and 3 for the<\/p>\n
offeircesi lpulnishable under Sections 3, 4 & 6 of the<\/p>\n
  justified and there are no grounds to interfere<\/p>\n
.  the said judgment. Therefore, he sought for<\/p>\n
" dismissal of the appeal.\n<\/p>\n
I, ,
\nxx
\n4 ‘<\/p>\n
E2<\/p>\n
ornaments and subsequentiy, in instaiments. PW.1 paid
\nRs.70,000\/– to Accused No.2. It is on this basis, the
\ncharges for the offences punishable under Sections”‘3_ & 4<\/p>\n
of the D.P.Act came to be framed. It was the <\/p>\n
of the prosecution that the dowry dernanded’a;ndif_revceived_A  <\/p>\n
by the accused was not restored the deceased’–or_Vto”her<\/p>\n
parents within the period a1_1owed—- under  “therefovre,F,<\/p>\n
they are guilty of the charge ‘jruni.shah}c_ urihder\ufb02gsection 6 V<\/p>\n
of the DP. Act. It  tti1:\u00abe_accusediifpersons are
\nfound guilty of the offences under”‘S.ec:f.ioi’3s 3 & 4 of the
\nD.P.Act,   a_cc:u’sed—-‘under Section 6 of
\nthe  P..ct;    Therefore, it is necessary to<\/p>\n
\ufb01nd-out to vyh_ethe1*…\u00a7-~the prosecution has proved the<\/p>\n
 ”     ‘ ‘acceptance of dowry by the<\/p>\n
 a;$\u00a7e]a1a;r\u00a7_ts:;\/’:”icc1.;sed Nos. 1 8: 3 .<\/p>\n
1?:.}–‘i: noticed earlier, about 3 or 4 days prior to<\/p>\n
O4.12’..1Q98, the deceased was found missing from<\/p>\n
V”‘V’.AArnatrimonial home and her dead body was later found in<\/p>\n
 Channel near Ssangarasetty Halli viiiage on<\/p>\n
13<\/span>
\n04.12.1998. it is thereafter, PW..?,\u00bb the elder brother of<\/p>\n
PW. 1 \ufb01led complaint to the police and on the basis of the<\/p>\n
said complaint, PW.15 registered the case in\u00bb—__UDR<\/p>\n
No.34\/1998 and submitted the UDR FIR to .tlle”l-{higher<\/p>\n
officials as per Ex.Pl’7. As could be seen  <\/p>\n
there has been no allegation in tlflemsaid  lvodgencl.<\/p>\n
by PW.2 regarding the alleged dem’aridV_<\/p>\n
dowry by any of the acctlsedl. persoris’-i.3rior “to the<\/p>\n
marriage. In the  c_om_pla1.nt;’-._gon1y–lithe fact of
\nmarriage of the deceased  and missing<\/p>\n
of thew”(iece:a;sled*f:.; from”-.the””‘rn’atrirr1onial home from<\/p>\n
01.12.  to Search for her and<\/p>\n
about thevll”deadVVbociyl “being noticed in a channel on<\/p>\n
   been stated. Of Course, the complaint<\/p>\n
   the younger brother of PW.1. if one<\/p>\n
 seethe’ieVidence of PW.2, he had the knowledge of<\/p>\n
 pfefinarriage talks. Absence of any allegations<\/p>\n
  glnjeigarjding any demand or acceptance of dowry in the<\/p>\n
  _VeQlII3.plaint lodged by PW.2 at the earliest point of time, as<\/p>\n
 rightly contended by the learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
14<\/span><\/p>\n
appellant, is a circumstance to doubt. the case of the
\nprosecution in this regard. According to the evidence of<\/p>\n
PW.1 Accused Nos. 1 to 3 were present at <\/p>\n
pre–1narriage talks and all of them demanded <\/p>\n
subsequently, he paid Rs.’\/”0,(.’.r'(h)”(Al)V\/”–“\u00abt_()”-4′   A<\/p>\n
Accused No.2. However, as perv4’t_h:e.V_evider;ce~of <\/p>\n
Puttegowda, another youngeri’ brother  .    A
\nAccused Nos.1 to 3   thelvltirnle of pre
\nmarriage talks, Accuseidiltloe. dowry and
\nlater PW.}   Accused No.2.\n<\/p>\n
the deceased, in her<\/p>\n
evidence has’ not..c1early..indicated as to whether she was<\/p>\n
present atthe’vtimVe oft’ p.re–marriage talks. Therefore. she<\/p>\n
 \u00abis  the compete;a–t”witness to speak with regard to the<\/p>\n
  of dowry by any of the accused nor her<\/p>\n
evidence.in\u00a7iicates her presence at the time of acceptance<\/p>\n
 of the’  by Accused No.2. Therefore, her evidence is<\/p>\n
 consequence in this regard. PW.6wPuttegowda is<\/p>\n
   __the maternal uncle of PW.}.. According to the case of the<\/p>\n
prosecution, PW.6 was also present at the time of pre-<\/p>\n
15<\/span><\/p>\n
marriage talks. Though he has stated in his evidence<\/p>\n
that he was present at the time of prewmarriageo’p:.’ta,lks,<\/p>\n
according to him, none on behalf of the <\/p>\n
present and in his presence no diseussi9n_:”tool\u00a7’ place, <\/p>\n
Therefore, he was declared hostilelandh’ <\/p>\n
examined by the learned Public lP.ro’secu:;oVi’;V;<\/p>\n
nothing in the cross–exam1nation, which’ xyouldiyfbe of any
\nhelp to the prosecutioiin’  evidence of PW.6
\nis of ne assistance’   PW?-\n<\/p>\n
    of same village.\n<\/p>\n
l”‘IOVV\u20ac\\VIiEI'”,'”   is””‘e-fvino assistance to the
\n him he only came to know<\/p>\n
about the’pre–1na.rria;ge..\u00ab–“talks and the demand of dowry<\/p>\n
 ~._bye-‘:o__ifhe..oaccused’ persons. Therefore. his evidence is only<\/p>\n
liea1’\u00ab.say’ieVi.dence, as such, his evidence is of no legal<\/p>\n
 PW.8–Sannakarigowda, another younger<\/p>\n
 brotherrof PW.l has stated that all the accused persons<\/p>\n
V\ufb02pyvere’ present during the pre–marriage talks and at that<\/p>\n
  _,V_tFime Accused No.2 demanded for dowry of Rs.l,()().()00\/W<\/p>\n
in cash and 70 gms gold ornaments and after discussion,<\/p>\n
16<\/span><\/p>\n
it was agreed that dowry of Rs.80,000\/- in cash and 60
\ngins of gold ornaments has to be given. His evidence do<\/p>\n
not clearly indicate as to whether he was present”<\/p>\n
time of alleged demand of dowry by  <\/p>\n
PW. 1. This is all the oral evic1ence.i_ri,resbei:tV:of7:th’e<\/p>\n
charge under Sections 3, 4  6  . \u00ab. V’ <\/p>\n
13) From the above,   thiere is no
\nconsistency in the levliidenjce .4 witnesses with
\nregard to  Vdiaecleptance of the
\ndowry.  to  witnesses. the<\/p>\n
demand   by’ Accused No.2 and it was
\nAccused’   the dowry said to have been<\/p>\n
given by PW.    not their say that Accused Nos.l & 3<\/span><\/p>\n
Amado ariyydevmand for dowry in any form. Therefore,<\/p>\n
th”eir\u00abAIi’iei”_eV.__pVi;’eserice at the time of alleged pre-marriage<\/p>\n
tailrs  by itself incriminate them with the offence.<\/p>\n
 1.4} As noticed above, since Accused No.2 died<\/p>\n
   Welven prior to the framing of charge, Accused No.2 had no<\/p>\n
opportunity to controvert the allegations made against<\/p>\n
E7<\/p>\n
him that he demanded and accepted the dowiy.<\/p>\n
Therefore. in the absence of proof that AccL1secl,_:”1\\lo.2<\/p>\n
demanded and accepted the dowry, Accused _l’\u00a7’o’s\u00ab’…’1i’. H<\/p>\n
cannot be saddled with the criminal liabilityliof V. <\/p>\n
and acceptance of the dowry. to <\/p>\n
nature of the evidence available on fe.co:”d, in”in3,’..,opi131ioi1_.Vt><\/p>\n
the learned Sessions   holding
\nAccused Nos.1 8: 3 V  punishabie
\nunder SectionS’_’~34.__4   the absence
\nof any   Nos. 1 81 3 made
\nany “‘ae-cepted the same. either
\nprior oi=._at   gjnarriage or subsequent. there<\/p>\n
to the Colurtd belowdis  justified in holding that the<\/p>\n
 Ahasll’p1**oved the guilt of the appellants for the<\/p>\n
 under Sections 3, 4 8: 6 of the<\/p>\n
D’.P__.:}Xct.v_Eni:’:t_liis View of the matter, the judgment. under<\/p>\n
l”=-\u00ab.___”-..appeaI  this regard is perverse. illegal and cannot be<\/p>\n
  “””sust’a}1ned. ii _,<\/p>\n
18<\/span><\/p>\n
15) Having regard to the above discussion. I hold<\/p>\n
that the appeal with regard to the conviction ef the<\/p>\n
appellants for the offences punishable under <\/p>\n
4 8: 6 of the D.P.Aet is liable to be set aside.      A<\/p>\n
16) As noticed earlier,:=__ the A. llearined. “eo1,11<zsel<\/p>\n
appearing for the appellants: 'aiirly Vsu,_b"mit,tedV'i't,l1.\u00a7;\u00a7.?  ;<\/p>\n
regard to the fact that the:"".appellanis:have already
\nundergone the period 'ofseriteiijicveto:'substantial period.
\nthe legality of the eon'vietion*u_i1_der'_ lS;'eei:i.ons 498–A and<\/p>\n
304(8) of 'is;\/Encithjeingfp1;.rsf.1led\u00a7'"Therefore, there is<\/p>\n
no need riie  _the correctness of the finding
\nrecordedV..hy.the-_Coi;1rt"below in this regard. In this view<\/p>\n
of the"n<1.atter;'\u00bb thetappeal deserves to be allowed in part.<\/p>\n
  the appeal is allowed in part.\n<\/p>\n
 of conviction and order of sentence dated<\/p>\n
 O5.0i?0O4 passed by the 15* Additional Sessions Judge.<\/p>\n
 in s.(:. No.225\/1999 with regard to the charges<\/p>\n
  levelled under Sections 3, 4 8: 6 of the D.P.Act is hereby<\/p>\n
set aside. The appel1ants\/ accused are acquitted of the<\/p>\n
,,._<\/p>\n
if<\/p>\n
5*\u00bb.\n<\/p>\n
19<\/span><\/p>\n
above said charges. However, the appea}. with regard to<\/p>\n
judgment of conviction and order of sentencevV.i’o_ifVt:he<\/p>\n
offences punishable under Sections 498~\u00abA  :,ot7 _<\/p>\n
IPC is hereby con\ufb01rmed. The learijied Se_3’sio–de,  2<\/p>\n
directed to issue modi\ufb01ed conviotjiong”warrant. to J=.2:ei_1<\/p>\n
Authorities in respect of  app’e1Viants”V:da\u00a7g \u00bb..pVe;Vr_\u00a7 t41fii:–:\ufb01’V”:\\><\/p>\n
judgment.\n<\/p>\n
KGR*V<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Manjegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 16 July, 2010 Author: K.N.Keshavanarayana INTEHEHHHICOURTCH?KARNATAKAJMPBANGALORE DATED THIS THE 16″‘ DAY OF JULY 201(V)_.-.___ BEFORE THE HON’BLE am JUSTICE K N K CRIMINAL APPEAL No. :39 or i26.rI;%I}..(C)’ \u00e9 T BETWEEN: I. MANJEGOWDA, ‘ S\/O. LATE SANi\\iEC\u00a7Q\\R?D1_\u00a7, ” ‘ AGED 30 YEARS. ‘ I * 2. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-141446","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nManjegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 16 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Manjegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 16 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-07-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-02-22T04:45:45+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Manjegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 16 July, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-22T04:45:45+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010\"},\"wordCount\":2887,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010\",\"name\":\"Manjegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 16 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-22T04:45:45+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Manjegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 16 July, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Manjegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 16 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Manjegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 16 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-07-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-02-22T04:45:45+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Manjegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 16 July, 2010","datePublished":"2010-07-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-22T04:45:45+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010"},"wordCount":2887,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010","name":"Manjegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 16 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-07-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-22T04:45:45+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manjegowda-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-july-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Manjegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 16 July, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/141446","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=141446"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/141446\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=141446"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=141446"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=141446"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}