PERAIPALLI SUBAN BASHA Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision has been filed under Ss. 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Cr.P.C.') challenging the judgment dtd. 5/5/2011 in Crl.A.No.55 of 2011 on the file of the learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Kurnool at Nandyal, whereby and whereunder the conviction and sentence of simple imprisonment for a term of one year and fine of Rs.5,000.00 imposed for the offence punishable under Sec. 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity 'the IPC.,') by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Allagadda, in C.C.No.236 of 2008, dtd. 24/3/2011, was confirmed.

(2.) I have heard the arguents of Sri B.S. Reddy, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri K. Sandeep, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent.

(3.) The learned counsel for the revisionist, while reiterating the grounds raised in the revision, submitted that the learned Appellate Court failed to see that the evidence on record would not constitute any offence for the alleged offence charged; the evidence of PWs.1, 2 and 4 did not inspire any confidence; no independent witness was examined to corroborate the testimony of PW.1; PWs.3, 5 and 7, being the independent witnesses, did not support the case of the prosecution, therefore, the learned Courts below ought to have given benefit of doubt to the revisionist. It is further submitted that the de facto complainant died on 20/5/2014, and to that effect, a photocopy of the death certificate was filed. The revisionist and the de facto complainant were blessed with one daughter who had already got married. The revision was filed in the year 2011 and 14 years have passed by, and urged to show some leniency towards the revisionist and requested to modify the sentence already undergone. Alternatively, however, the learned counsel for the revisionist volunteers that an amount of Rs.10,000.00 may be imposed as a measure of penance and urged to dispose of the revision.