GUJULA SATYANARAYANA REDDY Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed against the judgment and sentence passed by the Special Judge for trial of cases for Atrocities against Schedule Tribe and Schedule Castes, Mahabubnagar-cum-Additional Sessions Judge, at Khammam. The accused was tried for an offence punishable under Section 3(1)(xii) of S.Cs. and S.Ts. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The brief facts are as follows :- The complainant, PW-1, is a resident of Kottamvarigudem. She belongs to Schedule Tribe. The accused is a Reddy by caste and is a resident of Amardha. PW1 used to go for coolie work in the field of Gujjula Vinna Reddy, who is the father of the accused. The accused being in dominant position over will of PW1 lured her to marry him and he inhabited with her. The parents of the accused refused their marital relationship. However, the accused left his house and lived with PW-1 in her house at kottamvarigudem for 5 months. In the month of December 1991 the brother of the accused came and took away the accused. From then onwards the accused stopped coming to PW-1. PW-1 and her parents got suspicion and went to the house of the accused in Amardha and asked him to marry PW-1. The accused flatly refused to marry PW-1. By that time PW-1 was pregnant. On 18-4-1992 at 1 p.m. PW-1 along with her parents came to Police Station and gave the complaint and the crime was registered under Section 420, I.P.C. and under Section 3(1)(xii) of Central Act 33/89. On the above facts the learned Judge framed charges under Section 420, I.P.C. and also under Section 3(1)(xii) of the S.Cs. and S.Ts. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Central Act 33/89). When the charges were read over and explained to the accused the accused denied the chargers and claimed to be tried.

(2.) The prosecution to bring out the guilt of the accused examined P.Ws.1 to 5 and marked Exs. P-1 to P-4. The accused did not lead any evidence.

(3.) Considering both oral and documentary and other evidence on record the learned Judge found the accused guilty for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(xii) of Central Act 33/89 and he sentenced the accused to undergo imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rupees 1,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 months.