KARTHIKEYAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Revision Petitioner herein, who is the accused in C.C.No.3378 of 1996 on the file of the XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, was convicted for offences under sections 498-A, 406 of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 498-A IPC sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year the offence under Section 406 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and the said sentence of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently. THE said conviction and sentence were also confirmed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Tract Court No.V, Chennai, in Criminal Appeal No.411 of 2003. Aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the petitioner has preferred this Revision Case.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution in brief is that the Revision Petitioner, who is the first accused, is the husband of PW.1. THE second accused is the mother-in-law, who died pending trial. THE third and fourth accused are sisters of the first accused, who were acquitted by the trial court. THE marriage of the first accused and PW.1 was performed on 11.06.1993. At the time of marriage, she was given 30 sovereigns gold jewels and other silver articles and one pair of diamond stud. THE house hold articles were also given as Sridhana properties. THE first accused and PW.1 were living along with mother-in-law, father-in-law and sister-in-laws as joint family. PW.1 became pregnant. Her husband demanded a sum of Rs.10,000/-. THE first accused brought PW.1 from Bangalore to Chennai. THE first accused demanded a sum of Rs.25,000/-, but the brother of PW.1 had informed that he had no money. THE first accused left PW.1 in her brother's house informing that she could come to matrimonial home only on bringing jewels. On 10.01.1994, the first accused again came to Chennai and insisted for cash and jewels. On 19.05.1994 PW.1 delivered a female child. At that time, the first accused along with his sisters came to see the child. He again demanded a sum of Rs.25,000/-. As the amount was not given by the brother of PW.1, quarrel arose among the accused and the brother of PW.1. PW.2, who is the brother of PW.1, made attempts for PW.1 to join her husband. But the mother-in-law of PW.1 and others refused to take her back to the matrimonial home. After some time, PW.1 gave complaint Ex.P1 to the police. PW.7 Inspector of Police on receiving the complaint registered a case in Crime No.3 of 1996 and prepared First Information Report Ex.P5. He recorded the statement of witnesses. He arrested the accused and sent them for remand. She recovered the jewels from the accused. M.O.1 to M.O.12 are the articles recovered by the police. As PW.7 was transferred, PW.8, Inspector of Police took up further investigation and after completion of investigation laid final report against the accused.

(3.) AFTER analysing the evidence, both the Courts below have convicted and sentenced the 1st accused alone as already stated above. The courts below acquitted 3rd and 4th accused. The 2nd accused already died.