Throwing a slipper is not instigating suicide: High Court
After 13 years, HC acquits girl’s cousin of the charge of forcing the father of her lover to suicide
A real-life romantic family drama, unlike in the movies, ended up in multiple court cases and a death. A 25-year-old who was trying to get his cousin married to her lover ended up being accused of abetting the suicide of her potential father-in-law in 2002. After he faced the case for 13 years, the High Court finally ruled in his favour saying assaulting with footwear and humiliating someone does not amount to abetting suicide. At the age of 38, the accused is absolved in the case.
Chinmay, second son of Devegowda, was in love with Shravya. Shravya happened to be the cousin of Naresh. The affair between Shravya and Chinmay was going on for a long period. Once when Chinmay and Shravya were in a room together, neighbours locked them up. The scandal led to great embarrassment for both the families and discussions were held to sort out the issue. However, after the incident, Chinmay refused to marry Shravya. The accused and his family members were enraged and were determined to perform the marriage of the two lovers.
Shravya sat on a strike in front of Devegowda's house for a week. The two families engaged in regular quarrels. According to the HC order, “A number of cases were also filed by them against each other which were pending in the courts.” Following the scandal, there were incidents of Naresh and Shravya throwing footwear on Devegowda and his family members.
On May, 8, 2002, Devegowda was returning home after attending the court in one of the cases between the two families. After dinner he went out, but did not return. The following day he was found hanging from a tree. Devegowda’s first son Prajwal filed a police complaint. In the trial, 20 witnesses were examined. Most of them were relatives and close family members of the two families. But in the trial court, Naresh was acquitted. The State filed an appeal in the HC in 2007. The judgement in the appeal was given by Justice Pradeep D Waingankar on April 25.
The order noted that there was allegations that Naresh had created pandemonium and abused Chinmay and threatened his life. He had also filed a complaint against Chinmay of having an illicit relationship with one Shivamma. Complaints were filed against the extended family of Chinmay and Devegowda as well. It was also alleged that Naresh and his friends had beaten Devegowda with aslipper a few days before he committed suicide. For a week leading up to the suicide, Shravya was sitting on a strike in front of Devegowda’s house every evening.
In its order, the HC noted that there was no doubt that Chinmay and Shravya were in love with each other but the former declined to marry after the locking up incident. Acquitting Naresh, the court said that there is “no mensrea on part of the accused (Naresh) for the reason that he wanted to see his sister (cousin Shravya) married to PW16 (Chinmay) who had already spoiled her character. While doing so, if father of Chinmay was annoyed and thereby he committed suicide, accused cannot be held responsible for the same. It cannot be said that accused instigated or abetted him to commit suicide. At the most, the acts of Naresh and Shravya might have humiliated Devegowda. A humiliation does not amount to instigation or abetment.”
(Names of people involved changed).
A real-life romantic family drama, unlike in the movies, ended up in multiple court cases and a death. A 25-year-old who was trying to get his cousin married to her lover ended up being accused of abetting the suicide of her potential father-in-law in 2002. After he faced the case for 13 years, the High Court finally ruled in his favour saying assaulting with footwear and humiliating someone does not amount to abetting suicide. At the age of 38, the accused is absolved in the case.
Chinmay, second son of Devegowda, was in love with Shravya. Shravya happened to be the cousin of Naresh. The affair between Shravya and Chinmay was going on for a long period. Once when Chinmay and Shravya were in a room together, neighbours locked them up. The scandal led to great embarrassment for both the families and discussions were held to sort out the issue. However, after the incident, Chinmay refused to marry Shravya. The accused and his family members were enraged and were determined to perform the marriage of the two lovers.
Shravya sat on a strike in front of Devegowda's house for a week. The two families engaged in regular quarrels. According to the HC order, “A number of cases were also filed by them against each other which were pending in the courts.” Following the scandal, there were incidents of Naresh and Shravya throwing footwear on Devegowda and his family members.
On May, 8, 2002, Devegowda was returning home after attending the court in one of the cases between the two families. After dinner he went out, but did not return. The following day he was found hanging from a tree. Devegowda’s first son Prajwal filed a police complaint. In the trial, 20 witnesses were examined. Most of them were relatives and close family members of the two families. But in the trial court, Naresh was acquitted. The State filed an appeal in the HC in 2007. The judgement in the appeal was given by Justice Pradeep D Waingankar on April 25.
The order noted that there was allegations that Naresh had created pandemonium and abused Chinmay and threatened his life. He had also filed a complaint against Chinmay of having an illicit relationship with one Shivamma. Complaints were filed against the extended family of Chinmay and Devegowda as well. It was also alleged that Naresh and his friends had beaten Devegowda with a
In its order, the HC noted that there was no doubt that Chinmay and Shravya were in love with each other but the former declined to marry after the locking up incident. Acquitting Naresh, the court said that there is “no mensrea on part of the accused (Naresh) for the reason that he wanted to see his sister (cousin Shravya) married to PW16 (Chinmay) who had already spoiled her character. While doing so, if father of Chinmay was annoyed and thereby he committed suicide, accused cannot be held responsible for the same. It cannot be said that accused instigated or abetted him to commit suicide. At the most, the acts of Naresh and Shravya might have humiliated Devegowda. A humiliation does not amount to instigation or abetment.”
(Names of people involved changed).
