RAVEENDRAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused in C.C. No. 798/1998 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam is the revision petitioner herein. He was charge sheeted by the Circle Inspector of Police, Central police station, Ernakulam in Crime No. 749/1997 of that police station under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in nutshell was that the revision petitioner married the de facto complainant on 09.02.1981 and thereafter, they were living together as husband and wife and while they were living together, he used to manhandle her, treat her cruelly and also harassed her with a view to coerce her father to meet his unlawful demands for transfer of five cents of land. On 20.12.1997 at about 8.45 p.m., he assaulted her with hands and kicked her and beat her with a wooden roller used for making chappathies and thereby, he had committed the offence punishable under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code. After investigation, final report was filed and the case was taken on file as C.C. No. 798/1998 under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code.

(3.) When the revision petitioner appeared before the court below, after hearing both sides, charge under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code was framed and the same was read over and explained to him and he pleaded not guilty. In order to prove the case of the prosecution, PWs 1 to 10 were examined and Exts. P1 to P7 were marked on their side. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the revision petitioner was questioned under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure and he denied all the incriminating circumstances brought against him in the prosecution evidence. He had further stated that he had not committed any offence and in fact, both he and PW1 were living happily and when PW1's brother had some illicit connection with a Harijan girl and on account of that illegal relationship, when she became pregnant, he interfered and insisted for their marriage and on account of that, the marriage was conducted and due to that, there was some enmity between PW1, himself and her family members which prompted her to file a false case against him at the instigation of her family members. The revision petitioner himself was examined as DW1 and Exts. D1 to D4 were marked on his side.