KONDEPUDI SRIRAMAMURTHI Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was convicted under Section 6 of the Child Marriage Restraint Act XIX of 1929 and sentenced to simple imprisonment till the rising of the Court and a fine of Rs. 500.00 or in default to simple imprisonment for three weeks. He appealed against the conviction and sentence to the Sessions Judge, East Godavary who while confirming the conviction reduced the fine to a sum of Rupees 100/- or in default simple imprisonment for two weeks. The present revision case is directed against the conviction and questions its legality.

(2.) When the case came up for hearing before a colleague of ours, as it appeared to him that the reasons given by the learned Sessions Judge for reducing the sentence were not convincing, he directed the issue of notice to the petitioner, to show cause why the sentence should not be enhanced. The case was after the notice again posted for hearing before one of us who considered it desirable that the matter should be heard and determined by a bench. The case comes before us thus.

(3.) The petitioner, raises a point of law with which we shall deal first before considering the question of enhancement of the sentence. He contends that the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the case beyond the period of one year provided by Section 9 of the Act and that therefore the conviction is bad. The marriage to which the offence related took place on 14-6-1955. The complaint which was made by a brother of the petitioner was presented on 5-6-1956. The Magistrate posted the case to 22-6-1956 for the preliminary enquiry which Section 10 of the Act makes obligatory. The two sections of the Act which arc relevant read as follows: