SATISH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Kundan Rai, learned counsel for revisionists and Sri Paritosh Malviya, learned AGA for the State.

(2.) The facts of the present case reveals that revisionists herein had earlier faced trial being Sessions Trial No. 133 of 2005 for offences under Ss. 498A and 304B IPC, wherein by judgement and order dtd. 7/12/2006, they were granted acquittal.

(3.) Subsequently, the revisionists and four other accused persons faced another trial wherein by the impugned judgement and order dtd. 21/12/2013 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra in Complaint Case No. 2164 of 2013 (Pratap Singh vs. Satish and others) they were convicted under Sec. 406 IPC and Sec. 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and were sentenced imprisonment for two years' each along with fine of Rs.5000.00 under Sec. 406 IPC as well as one year each along with fine of Rs.500.00 under Sec. 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, in default each has to undergo two months' additional imprisonment. Further they were directed to deposit Rs.25,000.00 as compensation under Sec. 357 Cr.P.C. The appeal thereof was partly allowed whereby only the present revisionists were convicted and rest of four accused persons were acquitted as well as conviction under Sec. 406 IPC was also set aside and they were convicted only under Sec. 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, however, sentence and the default sentences was not interfered. Under above background, the present criminal revision-petition has been filed challenging impugned judgement.