N PADMANABHAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this criminal revision case was the first ac-cused in C.C. No.88 of 2007 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate No.Ill, Salem. He was prosecuted along with four other persons for alleged offences punishable un-der Sections 498A, 506(ii) and 342 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Af-ter trial, the other four accused persons, who were none other than the parents, sister and sister's husband of the petitioner, were ac-quitted of all the offences by the trial Court by a judgment dated 22.10.2009. By the very same judgment, the petitioner, who figured as Al was convicted and sentenced to un-dergo simple imprisonment for 6 months and to pay a fine of Rs.500 and to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month in case of default in payment of fine for the offence under Section 498A alone. He was acquitted of the other offences, namely offences under Sections 506(ii) IPC and 342 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohi-bition Act.

(2.) Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Sessions Court, Salem in C.A.No. 123 of 2009. The same came to be disposed of by a judgment of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Salem dated 14.5.2010, confirming the couniction recorded and sentence imposed by the trial Court for the offence under Section 498A IPC. The correctness and the legality of the said judgment of the lower appellate Court is questioned by the petitioner in the present criminal revision case.

(3.) Before admission, the learned Govern-ment Advocate (Cri. side) took notice on behalf of the respondent police. The argu-ments advanced by Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, learned counsel for the petitioner and that of Mr. I. Paul Nobel Devakumar, learned Government Advocate (Cri. side) were heard The documents produced in the form of typed-set of papers, including the judg-ments of the Courts below, were also pe-rused.