Criminal Revision Case No. 1361 of 2005 · High Court

This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner-accused against the judgment, dated 5.8.2005 made by the II Additional District & Sessions Judge (FTC), Medak at Sanga Reddy in Crl.A.No.188 of

2003 confirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Sangareddy, vide judgment dated 22.12.2003 in C.C.No.395 of 2003. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: On 11.4.2002, the petitioner-A1 married the de complainant without any dowry and one month thereafter, the petitioner, his parents, sisters and brothers subjected the de facto complainant to cruelty mentally and physically by demanding dowry of Rs.50,000/- and five tulas of gold. On the complaint given by the de facto complainant, the police registered a case in Crime No.26 of 2002 for the offence under Section 498-A IPC against the petitioner and his parents, sisters, brothers viz., A1 to A6. The S.I. of police took up investigation and after completion of investigation, he filed the charge sheet against A1 to A6 for the offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC. In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 4 and got Ex.P-1 marked.

No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the accused. During the course of trial, accused No.6 died and hence, the case against him is abated. On appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found the petitioner-A1 alone guilty for the offence under Section 498-A IPC and accordingly, convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months. A2 to A5 were acquitted for the said offence. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence recorded against the petitioner-A1, he filed Crl.A.No.188 of 2003 and the said appeal was dismissed confirming the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court against the petitioner-A1. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision is filed by the petitioner-accused No.1. Heard and perused the material available on record.

The learned Counsel for the petitioner-accused submitted that the investigation officer was not examined in this case and the same is fatal to the case of the prosecution and that the marriage of the petitioner was performed with the de facto complainant forcibly. The learned Counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner was in jail for some period and he is wandering around the courts from 10 years and therefore, a lenient view may be taken insofar as the sentence of imprisonment is concerned. In the circumstances of the case and in view of the concurrent findings of both the Courts below, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the conviction and sentence recorded by the Courts below against the petitioner-accused. But however, in view of the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner-accused was in jail for some period, this Court is of the view that this is a fit case wherein a lenient view can be taken and the sentence of imprisonment imposed by the Courts below against the petitioner-accused can be reduced to the period already undergone.

In the result, the conviction recorded by the Courts below for the offence under Section 498-A IPC is confirmed and the sentence of imprisonment imposed by the Courts below against the petitioner- accused for the said offence is reduced to that of the period already undergone. The sentence of fine imposed by the Courts below for the above offence is confirmed. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is partly allowed. 23rd November, 2012 Nn _____________ RAJA ELANGO, J THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1361 of 2005

23.11.2012 Nn