Udupi, Aug 19: Athul Rao, who was a close friend of Padmapriya, wife of BJP leader and former Udupi MLA Raghupathi Bhat, would face no further investigation into charges of adultery or driving her to commit suicide. He, however, would face trial of offences of cheating, forgery etc for allegedly projecting himself and the deceased as husband and wife.
Raghupathi Bhat’s family had accused Athul Rao of enticing former wife from her marital home on June 11, 2008. On a complaint filed by the then Bhat's mother Saraswathi, the police traced her to a flat in Delhi. By the time family members arrived here to take her back, the 32-year-old woman was found hanging.
Acting on a plea by Rao, the Supreme Court set aside a Karnataka High Court's order of September 16, 2014. A bench of Justices Dipak Misra and A M Khanwilkar restored the trial court's order that had found no justification to direct further investigation. “The HC committed manifest error in interfering with the discretionary order passed by the trial court,” it said.
The high court had then allowed a petition by Bhat and directed for further investigation against accused Rao with regard to offences under Sections 306 (abetment of suicide), 497 (adultery) and 498 (enticing or taking away or detaining with criminal intent a married woman) of the IPC. Though the trial court had rejected the plea, it said if any evidence comes up during the trial of the same offences, appropriate charges would be framed against the accused.
“What is significant to note is that the high court has not overturned the satisfaction recorded by the trial court that two charge sheets filed by the investigating agency in connection with the same incident were founded on statements of 76 witnesses. Further, charge sheets have been filed after thorough investigation of the allegations made by the complainant from all angles and charges have also been framed. The case has been set down for trial,” the bench said.
The apex court, however, directed the Udupi court to conclude trial expeditiously – preferably within six months – as the case has been pending since 2008.
Comments
Add new comment