Court raps CBI, acquits man and parents in dowry assault case in Kochi

Kochi | A court here has rebuked the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) after acquitting three individuals in a dowry case, citing the agency's failure to provide evidence for the charges.

The special CBI court acquitted Sreekant Jayachandra Menon of Kodungallur, his father Jayachandran T K, and mother Beena Jayachandran.

Sreekant and his family were charged under various provisions of the Dowry Prohibition Act and sections of the Indian Penal Code following an investigation by the CBI.

According to the prosecution, Sreekant married Sruthy Suresh in 2018, and the couple later moved to Canada.

Sruthy alleged that she was subjected to brutal assaults there and forced to consume drugs.

She also claimed that the accused had forced her to terminate her pregnancy and that Sreekant had allegedly put toilet-cleaning granules into her mouth, causing burn injuries to her internal organs.

After returning to India, Sruthy alleged that she was abandoned by the accused.

The case was initially registered by the Chottanikkara police in December 2020 and was later handed over to the CBI in 2022 following the direction of the Kerala High Court.

Delivering the verdict, CBI Judge N Seshadrinathan began the judgment with the remark: “Burn the Habit — Not Life.” While acquitting the accused, the court observed that there was no evidence to support the claim that Sreekant had forcibly administered any granules as alleged.

It found no proof of physical or mental torture for dowry or any conduct intended to drive the woman to take her own life.

After examining medical records from Canada, the court noted that the woman had consumed the granules herself while under the influence of cannabis, resulting in burn injuries.

The court further observed that the CBI had failed to produce any evidence to show that Sreekant's parents had harassed Sruthy while she stayed at the matrimonial home in India.

“The CBI has miserably failed to prove its case,” the court said, adding that no evidence was found to establish the giving or taking of property as part of the marriage under the Dowry Prohibition Act.