MADDALA VENKATESWARA RAO Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is filed by the three accused who were convicted originally by (he trial Court viz., the II Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Vijayawada in SC No. 85 of 1986. They were convicted for offence under Section 306 IPC-abetment of suicide and under Sec. 498-A IPC- cruelty caused to a women by husband or relatives of husband. They were sentenced to suffer RI for a period of three years under each count and they were also ordered to pay a fine of Rs. 50/- euch under each count and in default in payment of fine to suffer simple imprisonment for seven days. In Crl. Appeal No. 93/88 which was disposed of by the III Additional Sessions Judge, Vijayawada on 10-8-1990, the convictions for offences under Sections 306 and 498-A IPC were set aside and instead the accused were convictad for an offence under Section 304-B IPC. an offence popularly known as "dowry death."

(2.) In this revision, Sri Ella Reddy contends that the judgment of the appellate Court is vitiated because the accused are convicted for an offence for which no charge was framed. They are convicted of an offence under Section 304-8 IPC which came into statute book No. 19-1 1-1986 while the alleged occurrence of the offence look place on 9-5-1986. This is a case of conviction under an ex- post facto law. He further contends that an offence under Section 304-B IPC is a much graver offence when compared to the offences under Sections 306 and 498 -A IPC. The Appellate Court has no power to convict these accused for the graver offence especially when no charge was framed for the graver offence.

(3.) The learned Public Prosecutor relies under Section 386 (b) Cr PC and tries to justify that this is a case of the Sessions Judge altering the rinding maintaining the sentence. He frankly stated that the proper course for the appellate Judge would have been to remand the case for a fresh trial acting under sub-clause (1) of Section 386 (b).