SATISH SHETTY versus STATE OF KARNATAKA

Citation: [2016] 3 S.C.R. 145 · Decided: 03-06-2016 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DIPAK MISRA · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2016] 3 S.C.R. 145 
SATISH SHETTY 
v. 
STATE OF KARNATAKA 
(Criminal Appeal No.1358 of2008) 
JUNE 3, 2016 
[DIPAK MISRA AND SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, JJ.] 
Penal Code, 1860 - ss. 498A, 306 - Dowry Prohibition Act, 
1961 - Commission of suicide by 25 year old women within two 
and a half years of marriage - Victim having 10 month old son and 
a pregnancy of twenty ll'eek - Acquittal of husband and his parents 
for offences punishable u!ss. 3, 4, 6 of the 1961 Act and ss. 498A 
and 304B - However, the High Court convicted the husband u!s. 
498A with rigorous imprisonment of three years and u!s. 306 with 
RI for five years - 011 appeal, held: There was good explanation 
for the delay in lodging the FIR - Victims closest telation-mother 
was a poor helpless lady and deceased had left behind children, 
thus, the factum of delay to be dealt with sympathetically - Judgment 
of the trial court Sl!tfered from such gross errors in approach and 
appreciation that it could not be saved on the principle that if two 
views are possible, there should be no inte1ference with a judgment 
and order of acquittal - Furthe1; since the High Court recorded a 
finding against the husband of causing cruelty to the deceased for 
his conviction u/s. 498-A, all the essential ingredients for raising· of 
presumption uls. l l 3A clearly made out - High Court gave good 
reasons on the basis of facts brought on record through evidence 
for exercising the discretion of invoking the presumption uls. l l 3A 
- Husband failed to rebut the presumptions raised against him u!s. 
l l 3A - Tims, the order passed by the High Court is upheld -
Evidence Act, 1872 - s. 113A. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 On the basis of relevant facts the High Court 
appears to be justified in holding that there is good explanation for 
the delay in lodging the FIR because PW-15 delayed the inquest 
proceedings without valid reasons leading to delay in the 
postmortem examination as well and only on knowledge of the 
145 
A 
8 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
146 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2016] 3 S.C.R. 
injuries etc. the mother of the deceased gathered strength to lodge 
the FIR. When the deceased died leaving a son of ten months old 
the mother of the deceased had many other things to worry for, 
including cremation of the dead body and in such circumstances 
the High Court was justified in criticizing the trial court for its hyper 
technical approach in blaming the mother of the deceased for lodging 
a delayed complaint. Delay in lodging the FIR or complaint is not 
fatal in all cases. The Court must show some sensitivity in cases of 
the instant nature where the victim's closest relation - mother is a 
poor helpless lady. Even a well to do person may suffer a state of 
mental confusion when struck by such a tragedy. The prosecution 
in such cases is likely to be delayed further if the deceased has left 
behind children. The issues relating to their safety and custody 
often require higher priority. Occurrences of the present nature 
require lodging of criminal case against persons who are already 
in the category of relation by virtue of matrimonial ties through the 
deceased and it is not always easy to take a decision whether to 
lodge a criminal case against a relation or not. Hence in such cases 
the factum of delay has to be dealt with sympathetically keeping in 
mind the mental condition of the close relations of the victim. (Para 
11] (152-E-H; 153-A-B( 
1.2 There is no merit in the submission that the judgment and 
order of the acquittal was not perverse or that it required no 
interference of the High Court. The views of the High Court are 
sound and it is accepted that the judgment of the trial court suffered 
from such gross errors in approach and. appreciation that it could 
not be saved on the principle that if two views are possible, there 
should be no interference with a judgment and order of acquittal. 
Hence, High Court proceeded to convict the appellant for the 
offences u/ss. 498-A and 306 IPC. [Paras 13, 23) [153-F-G; 157-G) 
1.3 In the instant case, after noticing the injuries on the person 
of victim which is not at all explained by the appellant husband 
although in the fateful night he and the deceased slept together in 
the same room before she consumed poison, the High Court came 
to a well considered finding that the deceased was being harassed 
both physically and mentally and in direct as well as indirect ways 
for non complia

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.