B RAMAMURTHI Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE CHENNAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal appeal is directed against the judgement of the learned sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandaram passed in SC. NO. 113/1999 dated 21. 10. 2002, convicting and sentencing the Appellants under Section 498a of IPC and to undergo three years Rigorous Imprisonment each and to pay a fine of rs. 2000/- each, in default to undergo three months Rigorous Imprisonment, however acquitting them from charges under Section 304b of IPC.

(2.) THE brief facts, which are necessary for the disposal of this Criminal appeal, are recapitulated as under:-The 1st accused is the husband of the deceased Sugandhi and the 2nd accused is the mother-in-law. PW. 1, Meenambigai is the mother of the deceased and the deceased was born to one Sadagopan and Meenambigai. The marriage between the deceased and the 1st accused took place on 12. 6. 1995 and the accused demanded 10 sovereigns of jewels at the time of marriage, but PW. 1 was able to give only 7 sovereigns of jewels, since the Binny Mill, where her husband was working at the time of the marriage of the deceased was under lock out. The 1st accused and sugandhi lived together as husband and wife along with the 2nd accused for about 6 months happily. Afterwards, at the instigation of the 2nd accused, the 1st accused started demanding three sovereigns of jewels from the deceased.

(3.) WHENEVER PW. 1 visited the house of the deceased, she used to complain that the accused are demanding three sovereigns of jewels and they subjected her to cruelty on that account. The deceased delivered a male child on 31. 5. 1996. Since pw. 1 did not give the balance of three sovereigns of jewels, Seemandam function was not informed to PW. 1 and she was not permitted to see the child. The deceased was also not permitted to go to her parents' house for delivery. On 5. 10. 1996, the 1st accused sent away the deceased from his house retaining the child with him, which necessitated the deceased to prefer a complaint to the women Police Station on 5. 10. 1996. Subsequent to the complaint, there was a panchayat at the instance of the 1st accused and the deceased was taken to the house of the 1st accused.