MOHANRAJ Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision Case is filed against the judgment of the learned XVI Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai in Crl.A.No.278 of 2016 confirming the judgment of learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore at Chennai in C.C.No.5679of 2007.

(2.) The respondent police filed a final report against the first petitioner under Sections 494, 498(A) and 506(ii) IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and against the petitioners 2 and 3 under Sections 494 r/w. 109, 498(A) and 506(ii) IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, alleging that the marriage between the defacto complainant and the first petitioner had taken place on 12.01.1990 and thereafter the petitioners subjected the defacto complainant to cruelty demanding 5 sovereigns of gold jewels and thatched house, in which the defacto complainant was living. That apart second and third petitioners in collusion with the first petitioner performed second marriage to the first petitioner with another woman. All the three petitioners harassed the defacto complainant causing her physical and mental cruelty. They also criminally intimidated the defacto complainant to finish the family, if the dowry is not given.

(3.) On the appearance of the petitioners/accused, they were furnished with the copies of the documents relied on by the prosecution free of cost under Section 207 Cr.P.C. Finding that there are materials available to frame charges against the first petitioner under Sections 494, 498(A) and 506(ii) IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and against the petitioners 2 and 3 under Sections 494 read with 109, 498(A) and 506(ii) IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, the learned trial Judge framed the charges accordingly and the accused were questioned about the charges framed against them. The petitioners denied the charges framed against them and demanded trial. During the trial, prosecution examined PWs.1 to 9 witnesses and marked Exs.P1 to P8. No evidence was produced on the side of the accused.