PONNUSAMI Vs. VISALAKSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Pudukkottai, confirming the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pudukkottai under section 494, Indian Penal Code, 1860, against the petitioner to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years.

(2.) The facts of this case giving rise to this revisions are as follows: P.W. 1, the complainant is the first wife of A-1, the petitioner herein. P.W. 1 married the petitioner about six years ago according to customs of their community known as Ambalakarar viz., blowing of horn by a woman, tying of tali and exchange of garlands. P.W. 1 and the petitioner lived together as husband and wife and about 3 months prior to 1st July, 1979, the petitioner sought the consent of P.W. 1 to marry A-2 as his second wife, which P.W. 1 refused to give. On a Friday prior to 1st July, 1979, the petitioner went to the house of P.W. 2 and wanted him to attend the marriage on 1st July, 1979, at Pillaiar Koil. P.W. 2 who is the brother-in-law of P.W. 1 informed P.W. 1 about the same. At the instance of P.W. 1, P.Ws. 2 to 4 questioned the petitioner about the proposed marriage and the petitioner retorted by saying that he has already decided to marry A-2 and there is no necessity for them to interfere. Then, on 1st July, 1979, at about 8 a.m. when P.Ws. 1 to 4 and others went to Pilliaiyar Koil, they saw A-1 tying a thali with a yellow string around the neck of A-2 standing in front of Pillaiyar Idol. Thereafter A-1 and A-2, exchanged garlands while A-8 was blowing horn. The other accused were receiving guests and offering sandal paste and betel leaves etc. All the objections by P.Ws. 1 to 4 were not heeded. P.W. 1 went to the house of the petitioner and found A-1 and A-2 living together. All her attempts to live with him proved to be of no avail and thereafter she issued a notice Exhibit P-1 to the petitioner, who also sent a reply admitting the marriage with P.W. 1, but denying the second marriage with A-2. Thereafter, she has filed a private complaint against A-1 and 8 others. Apart from P.W. 1, P.Ws. 2 to 4 were examined to prove about the factum of marriage of A-1 with A-2.

(3.) The trial Court convicted the petitioner (A-1) under section 494, Indian Penal Code, 1860, and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years. A-7 and A-8 under section 494 read with section 109, Indian Penal Code, 1860, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each and acquitted A-2, A-3, A-4, A-5 and A-9. On appeal, the learned Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction and sentence of the petitioner, but set aside the conviction of A-7 and A-8 and acquitted them. Hence this revision by A-1.