Case Note & Summary
The High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru considered two criminal appeals: Criminal Appeal No. 539 of 2014 filed by the accused under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against their conviction and sentence by the Fast Track Court, Mandya in S.C.No.20/2005, and Criminal Appeal No. 904 of 2014 filed by the State under Section 377 Cr.P.C. seeking enhancement of sentence and imposition of fine. The accused, consisting of two men named Kallegowda and one Chandra, were convicted for offences under Sections 304B and 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3, 4, and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The prosecution case was that accused No.1 Kallegowda married Anitha on 27.05.2002, and at the time of marriage, Rs.1 lakh cash and 100 grams of gold ornaments were given as dowry. After the marriage, the accused allegedly harassed Anitha by demanding additional dowry, including Rs.25,000 given later by her father, and a fixed deposit of Rs.50,000 in the joint names of accused No.1 and the deceased. The accused insisted she sign to withdraw it, and when she refused, she was driven out. A panchayat was held a week before her death, and the fixed deposit receipt was handed over to the accused. On 28.10.2004, Anitha was found dead in a stream within seven years of marriage. The trial court convicted accused Nos.1, 2, and 4, sentencing them to rigorous imprisonment for seven years under Section 304B IPC and varying terms for other offences, to run concurrently. Accused Nos.5 and 6 were acquitted. The accused appealed on grounds that the evidence was from interested witnesses, the alleged payments were customary and not dowry, there was no specific demand, the cause of death was not established, and harassment soon before death was not proved. The State argued that the prosecution evidence consistently proved demand and payment of dowry, harassment, and the unnatural death within seven years, satisfying the ingredients of Section 304B IPC and attracting the presumption under Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The judgment text provided ends abruptly during the State's arguments, and no final decision or ratio is available.
Issue of Consideration
Case Details
2020 LawText (KAR) (10) 41
Criminal Appeal No.539 of 2014 c/w Criminal Appeal No.904 of 2014
B. Veerappa, K. Natarajan
A.H. Bhagavan (for accused), Vijayakumar Majage, Addl. SPP (for State)
Kallegowda S/o Kallegowda, Kallegowda S/o Kullananjegowda, Chandra @ Chandrappa (in Crl.A.539/2014); State of Karnataka (in Crl.A.904/2014)
State of Karnataka (in Crl.A.539/2014); Kallegowda S/o Kallegowda, Kallegowda S/o Kullananjegowda, Chandra @ Chandrappa (in Crl.A.904/2014)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeals against conviction and sentence for offences under Sections 304B, 498A IPC and Sections 3,4,6 DP Act, and appeal for enhancement of sentence.
Remedy Sought
Accused appeal (Crl.A.539/2014) seeks setting aside of conviction and sentence; State appeal (Crl.A.904/2014) seeks modification of sentence to impose fine for offence under Section 3 DP Act.
Filing Reason
Accused convicted by Fast Track Court, Mandya in S.C.No.20/2005 for dowry death and cruelty; State dissatisfied with inadequacy of sentence and lack of fine.
Previous Decisions
Trial Court convicted accused Nos.1,2,4 under Sections 304B, 498A IPC and 3,4,6 DP Act, acquitted accused 5 and 6; sentenced to RI of 7 years for 304B, 1 year for 498A, 7 years for Section 3 DP Act, 6 months each for Sections 4 and 6 DP Act, all concurrent.
Issues
Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the commission of offences under Sections 304B and 498A IPC and Sections 3, 4, and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act?
Whether the trial court erroneously convicted accused based on interested witness testimony and insufficient evidence?
Whether the State proved demand of dowry and harassment soon before death to attract Section 304B IPC?
Whether the sentence imposed by the trial court is inadequate and requires enhancement?
Submissions/Arguments
Accused argued that evidence of PWs1-3 is highly interested and omnibus; no specific allegation of dowry demand prior to marriage; cash and gold given as per custom, not dowry; deceased found missing, body traced; delay in complaint; no evidence of harassment soon before death; prosecution improved case after one month; death cause not established; no presumption under 113B Evidence Act; convictional unsustainable.
State argued that marriage within 7 years; unnatural death; dowry demand and payment proved; evidence of PWs1-6,12,17 consistent; panchayat held; fixed deposit receipt handed over; accused wanted to encash, deceased refused; harassment caused unnatural death; prosecution proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Judgment Excerpts
The marriage of accused No.1- Kallegowda was performed with Anitha (deceased) on 27.05.2002 ... At the time of marriage, Rs.1.00 lakh by way of cash and gold ornaments weighing 100 grams along with clothes were given to the accused persons as dowry.
The Trial Court sentenced accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 7 years for the offence punishable under Section 304(B) of IPC; to undergo imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC: sentenced to under go imprisonment for 7 years for the offence punishable under Section 3 of DP Act; to undergo imprisonment for 6 months for the offence punishable under Section 4 of DP Act and to undergo imprisonment for another six months for the offence punishable under Section 6 of DP Act.
Procedural History
On 29.10.2004, PW.1 lodged complaint; Nagamangala police registered case under Sections 304B, 498A IPC and 3,4,6 DP Act; Taluka Executive Magistrate conducted inquest; post-mortem examination; accused Nos.1 & 2 arrested, others obtained anticipatory bail; CoD Police took over investigation and filed charge sheet; Magistrate took cognizance and committed case to Sessions; Trial Court framed charges including Section 302/34 IPC; prosecution examined 22 witnesses (PWs1-22), marked 45 documents (Exs.P1-P45) and 11 material objects; accused examined 4 defence witnesses (DWs1-4) and marked 15 documents (Exs.D1-D15); after trial, court convicted accused 1,2,4 under 304B, 498A IPC and 3,4,6 DP Act, acquitted accused 5,6; accused 3 died; sentenced as above; accused filed Crl.A.539/2014; State filed Crl.A.904/2014 for enhancement.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 304B, 498A, 302, 34
- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961: 3, 4, 6
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 374(2), 377, 313
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872: 113B
