ABIRAMI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been preferred against the judgment in C. C. No. 6064 of 2002 on the file of the III Metropolitan Magistrate, Chennai.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution in a nutshell is that on 8. 6. 1997 the marrige between the complainant and A1 was solemnized and at that time the parents of the complainant have offered 35 soverigns of gold ornaments, other silver articles and house hold articles as the gift to the groom. According to the complainant the marriage life of the complainant with A1 went on smoothly for six months and thereafter there arose a misunderstanding and that A1 used to demand Rs. 20 lakhs as additional dowry from the complainant and her parents. It is the further allegation of the complainant that A1 had developed illicit intimacy with one Ringu and he is living separately with her at T- Nagar.

(3.) P. W. 2 is the father of P. W. 1. He would admit the relationship of the parties. He would further corroborates the evidence of p. W. 1 to the effect that at the time of marriage between P. W. 1 and A1 35 soverigns of gold ornaments, silver articles were presented to A1. He would admit that since the relationship between P. W. 1 and A1 got strained there was a panchayat took place on 6. 7. 1998 and thereafter P. W. 1 used to stay in her husband's house for some time. According to P. W. 2, A1 had developed illicit intimacy with a Gujarathi girl viz. Ringu and that he enquried about this with A2 & A3 but they have not shown any interest in the matter and that there was a panchayat held on 6. 7. 1998 between A1 an P. W. 1. According to him (P. W. 2), A1 had demanded Rs. 20 lakhs in the presence of the panchayatdars and after the panchayat A1 had taken back P. W. 1 along with him, but on 15. 9. 1998 he had driven her out of the matrimonial home insisting her to bring rs. 20 lakhs. According to him, he was informed thata1 was residing with the said Ringu at plot No. 148/8 in Millennium Apartments, at North Usman Road, T- Nagar and P. W. 1 has preferred a complaint with Kothavalchavadi Police Station and also with Thousand lights Police Station and on 20. 1. 2002, A1 came to his house and took back p. W. 1 and they resided at Door No. 42, Kothavalchavadi Garden Street, Mannadi. But he had failed to maintain her and that P. W. 1 had preferred another complaint with All Women Police station, Kothavalchavadi on 14. 2. 2002.