Bangalore District Court
Fahamida vs Moinuddin on 16 June, 2025
C.C.No.5237/2018
KABC030141952018
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU CITY
Dated this 16th day of June 2025
PRESENT : SRI.SAHEEL AHMED S. KUNNIBHAVI, B.Com., LL.B.
(Spl.)
II Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru City
JUDGMENT UNDER SECTION 355 OF Cr.P.C.
1.
Sl. No. of the case C.C.No.5237/2018
Date of commission of
2. From 01.01.2014 to 11.03.2017
the offence (As per F.I.R.)
Siddapura Police Station,
3. Name of the complainant
Bengaluru City.
4. Name of the accused 1. Moinuddin,
S/o Shamsuddin,
R/at No.344,
Siraj Begam House,
Dayananda Nagar Slum,
Jayanagar 1st Block,
Bengaluru City.
2. Shamsuddin,
S/o Late Mohammed Peer
3. Shaien Taj,
D/o Shamsuddin.
2 C.C.No.5237/2018
A2 and A3 are R/at
No.47, Ramakrishna Nagar,
Sheshadripuram,
Bengaluru.
Sections 323, 498A, 504 and
The offences complained 506 of the Indian Penal Code
5.
of and Sections 3 and 4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act
6. Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty
The accused persons are
7. Final order
acquitted
8. Date of order 16.06.2025
The Police Inspector of Siddapura Police Station,
Bengaluru has filed Police Report against the for the offences
punishable under Sections 323, 498A, 504 and 506 of the
Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act.
2. It is the case of the Prosecution that on 11.10.2013 the
informant had been to the Police Station and lodged the
information that her marriage was solemnized with accused
No.1. Accused No.1 had taken Rs.2 lakhs cash, 250 grams
gold and other household articles. The marriage life of the
3 C.C.No.5237/2018
informant was peaceful with the accused for some days only.
These accused started torturing physically and mentally for
further dowry and pushed the informant out of their house.
She is blessed with a son. But however these accused have
not taken care of the informant. Later, as per the advise of
the elders, the informant was started living with the accused
No.1 in a rented house. But, other accused being the in-laws
instigate the accused No.1 to torture the informant physically
and mentally. On 11.03.2017 all these accused assaulted the
informant with their hands by abusing in a filthy language.
The informant left with no other option had been to the Police
Station and lodged the information against the accused
person.
3. Based on the First Information of CW1, the crime was
registered in Crime No.70/2017 at Siddapura Police Station.
The accused persons were arrested and produced before this
Court and enlarged on bail. On completion of the
investigation, the Police Inspector of Siddapura Police
Station, Bengaluru City filed Police Report against the
4 C.C.No.5237/2018
accused persons alleging that they have committed the above
said offences. After taking cognizance of the said offences, the
process was issued to them. The copies of the Police Report
and other prosecution papers are furnished to the accused
persons under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. After hearing, since
there were grounds for presuming that the accused persons
have committed offences triable by this Court, charges for the
offences punishable under Sections 323, 498A, 504 and 506
of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act have been framed and read over to the
accused persons in Kannada language. They have pleaded
not guilty and claims to be tried.
4. To prove the charges framed against the accused
persons, the prosecution has examined oral evidences as per
PW1 to PW5 and got marked documents as per Ex.P1 to
Ex.P4. After completion of the prosecution evidences, for the
purpose of enabling the accused persons personally to
explain any circumstances appearing in the evidences of the
Prosecution against them, examined them under Section 313
5 C.C.No.5237/2018
of Cr.P.C. They have submitted that they have no defense
evidence.
5. Heard the arguments of learned Senior Assistant Public
Prosecutor and the learned Counsel for the accused persons.
Perused the materials available on record.
6. The points for determination are;
1. Whether prosecution has proved the
offences charged against the accused
persons for the offences punishable under
Sections 323, 498A, 504 and 506 of the
Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of
the Dowry Prohibition Act beyond
reasonable doubt?
2. What order or sentence?
7. My answers to the above points are as follows:
Point No.1 : In the Negative,
Point No.2 : As per final order for the following:-
REASONS
8. POINT No.1 :- It is the case of the Prosecution that
6 C.C.No.5237/2018
accused No.1 is the husband of CW1 and accused No.2 and 3
are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the informant
tortured the informant physically and mentally for further
dowry and pushed the informant out of their house.
9. To prove the guilt of the accused, the Prosecution has
examined CW1/PW1 Famida who is the First Informant and
victim has deposed that her marriage was solemnized with
accused No.1. The accused have taken Rs.2 lakhs cash and
250 grams of gold at the time of marriage. All the accused
have taken care of the informant for some days only. After
the marriage, she has started living with her husband
accused No.1 in a rented house. Accused No.2 and 3 were
coming to their house occasionally. One Auto was given to
accused No.1. After the birth of her son, accused No.2 and 3
started instigating accused No.1 for further dowry. She was
pushed out of their house and forced to take further dowry.
She went to her parents house. On 11.03.2017 these accused
assaulted the informant with their hands by abusing in a
7 C.C.No.5237/2018
filthy language. She had been to the Police Station and lodged
the information against the accused persons.
10. To prove the guilt of the accused, the Prosecution has
examined CW4/PW2 Jahed who is the father of the informant
has deposed that on 11.10.2013 the marriage of her daughter
was solemnized with the accused No.1. After the marriage her
daughter was blessed with a son. At the time of marriage,
these accused have demanded Rs.5 lakhs cash. But however
he was able to pay only cash of Rs.2 lakhs. This witness
further has deposed that 250 grams gold and other jewelries
were given to the accused at the time of marriage. After some
time, these accused pushed his daughter out of their house
by demanding further dowry. These accused assaulted the
informant when she was in her 7 months pregnancy. CW1
has lodged the information against these accused.
11. To prove the guilt of the accused, the Prosecution has
examined CW6/PW3 Abida Banu and CW7/PW4 Yasmeen
who are the sisters of the Informant have deposed that the
8 C.C.No.5237/2018
marriage of their sister was solemnized with accused No.1. At
the time of marriage these accused have taken cash of Rs.2
lakhs and 250 grams of gold jewelries. After the marriage
these accused started torturing their sister CW1 for further
dowry. One Auto was purchased in the name of accused
No.1. Accused No.1 pushed the informant out of his house
and solemnized his second marriage.
12. To prove the guilt of the accused, the Prosecution has
examined CW12/PW5 M.N.Ravishankar who is an
Investigation Officer has deposed that on 13.03.2018 he has
taken charge from CW11 and recorded the further statement
of CW1, CW4 to CW10. After due investigation the Final
Report was submitted against these accused.
13. It is the case of the Prosecution that this accused No.1
being the husband of CW1 and the accused No.2 and 3 being
the father-in-law and mother-in-law tortured the informant
physically and mentally. During the course of arguments, the
learned Senior APP has relied the evidence of CW1 and
9 C.C.No.5237/2018
argued that soon after the incident CW1 had been to the
Police Station and lodged the information against the accused
persons. This accused No.1 had taken dowry of Rs.2 lakhs at
the time of marriage and also gold of 250 grams. CW1 in her
examination has categorically deposed that accused No.1 has
taken cash of Rs.2 lakhs and gold of 250 grams. The evidence
of CW1 is corroborated with the evidence of CW4 who is the
father of CW1. CW4 in his evidence has corroborated with the
evidence of CW1 that Rs.2 lakhs cash was given to the
accused No.1 and also gold of 250 grams. CW2 has also
deposed about the torture of these accused for further dowry.
CW6 and CW7 are the sisters of the informant have deposed
about the torture of these accused to CW1 for further dowry.
The evidence of CW2 who has conducted detailed
investigation corroborate these evidences that these accused
tortured the informant physically and mentally for further
dowry.
14. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the accused
has deposed that accused No.1 has not at all tortured CW1.
10 C.C.No.5237/2018
CW1 was happy with the accused No.1. The informant herself
left the company of CW1 and went away. The informant was
not ready to live with the accused No.1. The Counsel further
has argued that the false case was registered against these
accused. No independent witnesses were examined by the
Prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused persons. If at all
the independent witnesses were examined, the truth will
come before this Court. All the witnesses are the interested
witnesses. The learned Counsel for the accused further has
argued that out of 12 witnesses the Prosecution is able to
examine only 5 witnesses. Among these witnesses PW1 to
PW3 are the close relatives and CW12 is an Investigation
Officer who has filed the Final Report. In fact the entire
investigation was conducted by CW11. But, the Prosecution
has not examined this CW10 and CW11 who are the
independent witnesses. Further, the independent witnesses
CW7 to CW10 were dropped after giving sufficient
opportunity. The matter is pending since 2018 and even after
11 C.C.No.5237/2018
lapse of 8 years, the Prosecution is able to examine only 4
witnesses in support of their claim.
15. I have also carefully perused and found that the
informant has alleged in her information that she was taken
care by these accused only for two months and later they
have tortured physically and mentally for further dowry. CW1
further has alleged that she was pushed out of their house.
But, however in her evidence she has deposed that after the
marriage she has started living with her husband in a rented
house. Accused No.2 and 3 used to come to their house two
days in a week and they were living by the time of evening.
Whereas, as said supra CW1 has alleged that she was living
with her husband accused No.1 and accused No.2 and 3 who
are her in-laws. But whereas, as per her evidence she was
living with her husband accused No.1 in a rented house.
Accused No.2 and 3 were living in their house. Even though,
if they came to their house, they returned by evening. This
evidence of the informant creates doubt whether accused
No.2 and 3 tortured physically and mentally for further
12 C.C.No.5237/2018
dowry. This informant in her information has alleged that an
amount of Rs.2 lakhs was given to accused No.1 with 250
grams gold. Whereas, in her evidence she has deposed that
one Auto was given to this accused No.1. This version is not
at all found in her information that one Auto was given to
this accused No.1. This is a major improvement made by this
informant. Further, the informant in her information has
alleged that she came to the house of her husband as per the
words of her mother. But, however these accused abused
them in a filthy language and sent them back. Whereas, in
her evidence she has deposed that on 11.03.2017 these
accused came to her rented house and abused in a filthy
language by demanding further dowry. Whether the offence
was committed at the house of the accused No.1 to 3 or at
the rented house of the informant is riddle before the Court.
This matter is pending since 2018 and these accused are
regular to the Court. The only evidence available before the
Court is the evidence of CW1 and CW2 who is the father of
CW1 and CW7 who is the mother of CW1. These witnesses
13 C.C.No.5237/2018
are interested witnesses. Though there are no reasons to
deny the evidence of interested Witnesses, but, however the
learned counsel for the accused has argued that false case
was registered against the accused. The informant herself
was not interested in accused No.1.
16. The independent witnesses would mean that they do not
have any interest in the result of the case and is not even
closely related to the party in trial and they are not concerned
with the failure or success of the case. Though the
Investigation Officer has listed many independent witnesses,
but even after lapse of seven years the Prosecution is able to
only examine CW1 the informant and her parents CW2 and
CW3. As discussed supra, there are many discripencies and
improvements made by these witnesses wherein the
Prosecution is very much silent. The Prosecution has to
collect the events or sequences and circumstances to prove
the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts. The
chain of evidence that points strongly towards the guilt of the
accused without giving a little room of explanation of
14 C.C.No.5237/2018
innocence is relevant when the case was totally based on
interested witnesses. Further, the matter is pending since
2018 and the prosecution is able to examined only five
witnesses out of twelve to prove the guilt of the accused
persons. My Predecessor has dropped all these witnesses
after issuing NBW and proclamation. Under these
circumstances, I am holding that the Prosecution has not
proved the guilt of the accused persons for the offences
punishable under Sections 323, 498A, 504 and 506 of the
Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, I answer
Point No.1 in the Negative.
17. POINT No.2 :- For the reasons stated in Point No.1, the
Prosecution has not proved the guilt of the accused persons
for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 498A, 504
and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act beyond all reasonable doubt.
Therefore, the accused persons are not found guilty for the
15 C.C.No.5237/2018
aforesaid offences charged against them. In the result, I
proceed to pass the following;
ORDERS
Under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C, the
accused persons are hereby acquitted for
the offences punishable under Sections
323, 498A, 504 and 506 of the Indian
Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act.
Their bail bonds and surety bonds
will be in force till completion of appeal
period and thereafter, it will be stand
canceled.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, typed by her, corrected and
then pronounced by me in the Open Court, today this the
16th day of June 2025)
(SAHEEL AHMED.S.KUNNIBHAVI)
II Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Bengaluru City.
16 C.C.No.5237/2018
ANNEXURE
Witnesses Examined on behalf of Prosecution :-
PW1 : Famida, PW2 : Jaheed, PW3 : Abida Banu, PW4 : Yasmeen, PW5 : M.N.Ravishankar.
Documents marked on behalf of Prosecution :-
Ex.P1 : First Information, Ex.P1(a) : Signature, Ex.P2 : Spot Mahazar, Ex.P2(a) : Signature, Ex.P3 : Wedding Invitation, Ex.P4 : Six Photographs.
Material objects marked on behalf of Prosecution :-
NIL
Witnesses Examined on behalf of the accused :-
NIL
Documents marked on behalf of the accused :-
NIL
II ACJM, Bengaluru City.
[ad_1]
Source link