LexGOVINDARAJU versus STATE OF KARNATAKA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2009] 9 S.C.R. 1074 l \.- A GOVINDARAJU v. STATE OF KARNATAKA (Criminal Appeal No. 570 of 2003) B MAY 29, 2009 [V. S. SIRPURKAR AND .. R.M. LODHA, JJ.] 1 .. J Penal Code, 1860 - s.3048 - Death of woman within + •• seven years of marriage·,_ Demand of dowry and cruelty c alleged - Charges u/s. 302, 3048, 201 rlw. 34 /PC - Acquittal by trial court - Conviction of husband uls. 3048 by High Court - On appeal, held: Demand and payment of dowry and dowry harassment, cruelty meted out to the deceased and her unnatural death proved - High Court order justified - The ' } D case is covered by the presumption uls. 1138 of Evidence Act - Evidence Act, 1872 --s. 1138. ¥- -< Appeal - Power of appellate .court - Review of evidence - Permissibility - Held: The court has full power to review the E evidence and to arrive at its own independent conclusion either in appeal against conviction or acquittal. Appellant-accused alongwith his parents and brQther was alleged to have killed his wife (deceased). One of the + accused died before framing of the charges. Charges ' F were framed u/ss. 302, 3048, 201 r/w s.34 IPC. One of the remaining three accused died during trial. Trial Court acquitted both the accused. Hfgh Court, in appeal, confirmed the acquittal of one accused; while convicted the appellant u/s. 3048 IPC. Hen.ce the present appeal. G Dismissing the appeal, th~ Court i ..... HELD: 1. The judgment convicting the accused for the offence u/s. 3048 IPC is correct. High Court has H 1074 GOVINDARAJU v. STATE OF KARNATAKA 1075 appreciated the evidence very deeply and the trial court A had gravely erred in not accepting the evidence of PW- 1, without any justifiable reason. It is a basic principle that the evidence of witness has to be appreciated as a whole, when the evidence of an ordinary witness, who is not much educated and comes from a poor strata of society, 8 not having the advantage of education. The Court has to keep in mind all these aspects. The witness is not expected to remember every small thing, more particularly when he faces the shock of the untimely death of his near relative. The finding reached by the trial C court that there was no payment of dowry, appears to be a totally incorrect finding tending to be perverse. The main reason for this appears to be contradiction in the evidence of PW-1 and PW-18, completely ignoring the fact that PW-18 was an illiterate woman and could not be expected to remember the details regarding the date on D which the amount was paid to the appellant. [Paras 13 and 16] [1084-F-H; 1085-A-B; 1087-B-C] 2. In returning the finding that there was no dowry harassment to the deceased by the accused persons, the E trial court had completely ignored the evidence of PW-3, which remained absolutely unshaken on that issue. In fact, even PW-5 had supported the case of the dowry harassment and so did PW-6, who is the immediate neighbour of appellant/A-1. Of course, PW-6 was declared F hostile in his cross-examination. However, even he had admitted that there used to be quarrels in the house of the accused persons. The theory of love affair of the deceased was also denied by this witness in his cross- examination by the accused. PW-3 and PW-5 had . G specifically referred about the ill treatment of the deceased on account of non-payment of dowry and there was absolutely no cross-examination ori the payment of dowry, as also the complaints made by the deceased H 1076 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009) 9 S.C.R. A against the accused persons that she was ill treated on i account of non-payment of Rs. 5,000/- The finding recorded that there was no continuous onslaught, cruelty or harassment was clearly an incorrect finding, without even bothering to realize that there was no cross- B examination of the witnesses like PWs-1, 3 and 5 on that 'issue, though they had very specifically asserted that the deceased was being ill treated on account of non- payment of dowry. [Para 13) [1085-8-G] t· c 3. The High Court has full power to review the evidence and to arrive at its own independent conclusion whether the appeal is against conviction or acquittal. The High Court was also alive to the situation that it was considering an acquittal judgment wherein, firstly, there was a general presumption in favour of innocence of the D person accused in a criminal case, which presumption was strengthened by the acquittal, and
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.