Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Tribunal’s Compensation Exceeding Claimed Amount Found Just and Fair Under Motor Vehicles Act: No Deduction Errors Warrant Reduction: Gujrat High Court    |     When Two Accused Face Identical Charges, One Cannot Be Convicted While the Other is Acquitted: Supreme Court Emphasizes Principle of Parity in Acquittal    |     Supreme Court Limits Interim Protection for Financial Institutions, Modifies Order on FIRs Filed by Borrowers    |     Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail in Methamphetamine Case After Delay in Chemical Analysis Report    |     No Sign of Recent Intercourse; No Injury Was Found On Her Body Or Private Parts: Gauhati High Court Acquits Two In Gang Rape Case    |     Failure to Disclose Relationship with Key Stakeholder Led to Setting Aside of Arbitral Award: Gujarat High Court    |     Strict Compliance with UAPA's 7-Day Timeline for Sanctions is Essential:  Supreme Court    |     PAT Teachers Entitled to Regularization from 2014, Quashes Prospective Regularization as Arbitrary: Himachal Pradesh High Court    |     Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Anonymity Protections for Victims in Sensitive Cases: Right to Privacy Prevails Over Right to Information    |     Certified Copy of Will Admissible Under Registration Act, 1908: Allahabad HC Dismisses Plea for Production of Original Will    |     Injuries on Non-Vital Parts Do Not Warrant Conviction for Attempt to Murder: Madhya Pradesh High Court Modifies Conviction Under Section 307 IPC to Section 326 IPC    |     Classification Based on Wikipedia Data Inadmissible; Tribunal to Reassess Using Actual Financial Records: PH High Court Orders Reconsideration of Wage Dispute    |     Mere Delay in Initiation Does Not Justify Reduction of Damages: Jharkhand High Court on Provident Fund Defaults    |     Legatee Can Continue Suit Without Probate, But Decree Contingent on Probate Approval: Orissa High Court    |     An Award that Shocks the Conscience of the Court Cannot Stand, Especially When Public Money is Involved: Calcutta HC Reduces Quantum by Half    |     Trademark Transaction Within Territoriality Principle Subject to Indian Tax Laws: Bombay High Court Dismisses Hindustan Unilever's Petition on Non-Deduction of TDS    |     Concealment of Material Facts Bars Relief under Article 226: SC Reprimands Petitioners for Lack of Bonafides    |     Without Determination of the Will's Genuineness, Partition is Impossible: Supreme Court on Liberal Approach to Pleading Amendments    |     Candidates Cannot Challenge a Selection Process After Participating Without Protest : Delhi High Court Upholds ISRO's Administrative Officer Recruitment    |    

High Court Upholds Trial Court's Acquittal in Alleged Dowry Death Case: No Interference Called For When Trial Court’s View Is Possible

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling today, the High Court of Karnataka dismissed an appeal challenging the acquittal of two individuals accused in a dowry death case. The court upheld the trial court's decision, citing a lack of sufficient evidence to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt.

The appellant, Narasimharaju, had filed an appeal against the acquittal of T.S. Ramesh and Jayamma, in connection with the alleged dowry death and murder of his sister, Sumalatha. The trial, which was closely watched due to its implications on dowry-related crimes, concluded with the trial court finding inconsistencies in the prosecution's narrative.

In its judgment, the High Court observed, "The judgment of the Trial Court cannot be set aside merely because the High Court finds its own view more probable, save where the judgment of the Trial Court suffers from perversity or the conclusions drawn by it were impossible if there was a correct reading and analysis of the evidence on record." This statement was pivotal in affirming the trial court's decision.

The prosecution's case hinged on witness testimonies and an alleged oral dying declaration made by the deceased. However, the court found these pieces of evidence unreliable and inconsistent, leading to the conclusion that the guilt of the accused was not established beyond reasonable doubt.

The case also brought to light the complexities involved in legal proceedings related to dowry deaths. The court meticulously examined the testimonies of witnesses, the evidence presented, and the legal principles governing appeals against acquittal. It underscored the importance of thorough scrutiny in such cases, stating, "Unless the High Court finds there is complete mis-reading of the material evidence which led to miscarriage of justice, the view taken by the Trial Court which can also possibly be a correct view need not be interfered with."

Date: 28 November  2023

NARASIMHARAJU VS T.S. RAMESH

Similar News