Monday, September 13, 2010

Cop in dowry case faces court’s wrath

Cop in dowry case faces court’s wrath

Sessions court rules police inspector had falsely implicated a Vile Parle family though he knew they were ‘innocent’; family wants to put past behind them

Sunday, January 04, 2009 at 03:52:58 AM

Madhukar, Nanda and their son Ashish had been arrested after their daughter-in-law Meena committed suicide in 2007

In an alleged dowry death case, a police official has come under the court’s scanner for falsely implicating a family by submitting false evidence. If found guilty, police inspector Pandurang Tangadpalle of Vile Parle police station could face upto three months imprisonment.
“The investigating officer has acted with mala fide intention to book the accused and he fabricated false evidence with the intention that the accused be convicted and sentenced,” a sessions judge observed. He added that the policeman had done so “though he was aware the accused are innocent”.
The court issued a notice under charges of perjury (section 344 of CrPC for misguiding a court by giving false evidence) to Tangadpalle, and acquitted five members of a Vile Parle family of dowry harassment.

“From the conduct of PI Tangadpalle, it is apparent that he was acting as a puppet in the hands of Manohar Verma (the complainant). This is a fit case where the court should take cognisance of the offence of fabricating false evidence,” observed Sessions judge R D Jadhav, while issuing the notice to the officer.

The court observed that Tangadpalle had delayed filing an FIR and had fabricated the worth of valuables the deceased had received during marriage.

Case background
A case of dowry harassment was registered against Ashish Desai, his father Madhukar, mother Nanda and brothers Hemant and Umesh, after Ashish’s wife Meena committed suicide on March 3, 2007.

Based on a complaint by the deceased’s brother Manohar, the police arrested the Desai family. Manohar alleged Meena was harassed mentally and physically for dowry by the Desai family.

But the Desai family argued it had been a love marriage and as Meena’s father was against it, the couple wed in December 2000 only after her father’s demise. The couple had a son who was born three years after the marriage. Defence lawyers argued there had been no demand for dowry.

“The accused did not harass, nor make any demands for money. They never abused, nor beat Meena.” they said. The court while acquitting the family, observed that there was no evidence that the accused had subjected the deceased to cruelty or made any dowry demands.

Therefore there was no evidence they had caused her death or abetted the suicide. When contacted, Tangadpalle remained unavailable for comment.

We want son to move on 
“There would be quarrels between my son and Meena as they disagreed on certain issues but her death was not caused by dowry harassment. Whatever we have faced — mental, physical and social trauma — is our past.

The most difficult part was the trauma my son and grandson faced. We are consulting a psychologist to help my son finally move on in life. He is still under trauma and suffers from guilt pangs. He just wants to live for his son now,” Madhukar Desai said

No comments:

Post a Comment