MAHADEO Vs. SUNITA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner/accused has been convicted under section 384 of Indian Penal Code by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mangrulpir and the same has also been confirmed by the learned Sessions Judge, Akola in Criminal Appeal No. 248 of 1982 decided on 27-9-1982.

(2.) The facts leading to the present revision petition may be briefly stated as follows :

(3.) A charge under section 384 Indian Penal Code was framed against the accused on the ground that by inducing fear and terror in the mind of his wife Sunita, he got extracted her signature on the divorce deed and thus committed an offence of Extortion punishable under section 384 Indian Penal Code. The accused adjured his guilt and claimed to be tried. Sunita as complainant, examined herself, her mother Shantabai, her father Rama and uncle Govind and none other. On the basis of their testimony, the trial Court came to the conclusion that Sunita was being ill-treated by her husband, that she was beaten one day prior to the date of the incident, that she had sustained injuries, that she was threatended before the Sub Registrar and she was coerced into signing the Divorce Decd. This conclusion was based on the basis of deposition of Sunita as well as the corroboration from the evidence of her mother Shantabai, her father Rama All India Hindu Law Reporter 1985(1) and her uncle Govinda. The trial Court convicted the accused to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month fine of Rs. 1,500. The accused preferred appeal before the Sessions Judge, Akola and while confirming the conviction of the appellant/accused, the learned Sessions Judge reduced the sentence to one day's simple imprisonment till the rising of the Court and fine of Rs. 1,000. Thus, the applicant/accused having sustained the concurrent orders of conviction under section 384 Indian Penal Code has preferred this Revision Application.