NIZAM AHMED ALIAS BUBU Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By judgment and order, dated 19.01.2004, passed, in GR Case No. 557/2001, by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jorhat, the accused-petitioner, Nizam Ahmed @ Bubu, and his brother, Kazim Uddin Ahmed @ Kaju, were convicted under Section 498A read with Section 34 IPC and each of them was sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 (three) years and pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- and, in default of payment of fine, suffer simple imprisonment for another period of 6(six) months. Aggrieved by their conviction and the sentence, passed against them, both the convicted persons preferred an appeal, which gave rise to Criminal Appeal No. 14/2003, which was disposed of by judgment and order, dated 12.04.2004, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (ad hoc), Jorhat, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge, while upholding the conviction of the present accused-petitioner, Nizam Ahmed @ Bubu, set aside the conviction of the present accused-petitioner's brother, Kazim Uddin @ Kaju, and acquitted him of the charge, framed against him under Section 498A read with Section 34 IPC. While so maintaining the conviction of the present accused-petitioner, the sentence, passed against him, was, however, modified in the sense that his sentence of simple imprisonment for 3 (three) years with fine of Rs. 2,000/- was reduced to simple imprisonment for a period of 6 (six) months with fine of Rs. 500/- and, in default of payment fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of 2 (two) months. Still dissatisfied with the judgment and order, passed in the appeal aforementioned, the accused-petitioner has, with the help of this revision, put to challenge the finding of guilt, recorded under Section 498A IPC and the sentence passed against him.

(2.) The case of the prosecution may, in brief, be described thus: The marriage between the present accused-petitioner and the informant (PW1) was solemnised, on 10.10.1999, according to the Muslim Personal Law and the accused-petitioner and his spouse started living together at the house of the accused-petitioner as husband and wife. However, after about a week of the marriage, the accused-petitioner started ill-treating his wife (PW1). Usually, the accused-petitioner came home in drunken state, he used to abuse his wife and, at times, assault her not merely by using his hands, but also by means of lathi. In course of time, the accusedpetitioner demanded that a sum of Rs. 15,000/- be brought by PW1 from her parents. Though she did not, initially, inform her parents about the demand of money, which had been so raised by the accused-petitioner, she, later on, conveyed the demand of the accused-petitioner to her parents and her father opened, in her name, a monthly recurring deposit account of Rs. 500/- at a bank. Though PW1 reported to her mother-in-law and brother-in-law as regards the treatment, which she was being subjected to by her husband, they appeared to have approved the conduct of their son (i.e., the accused-petitioner). On 20.12.2000, the accusedpetitioner came home at night and assaulted PW1 and demanded that she shall bring Rs. 20,000/- from her parents or else, she (PW1) shall leave her matrimonial house. By raising his demand for money, as mentioned hereinbefore, the accused-petitioner drove PW1 out of her bedroom and, as a consequence thereof, PW1 had to sleep, on the sofa, in the drawing room of her matrimonial house. Though PW1 was, at that point of time, sick, her husband did not provide any medical treatment to her. Eventually, on 31.12.2000, she informed her father about the incident, her father came, in the morning, on the following day and took her away and got her treated by the doctor. Thereafter, neither the accusedpetitioner nor his mother or brother took any initiative to bring back PW1 to her matrimonial house. Left with no alternative, PW1 continued to leave with her parents and lodged, on 14.07.2001, at Jorhat Police Station, a written Ejahar. Treating the said Ejahar as First Information Report, a case, under Section 498A read with Section 34 IPC, was registered against the accused-petitioner and his said brother and, on completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was accordingly laid, under Section 498A/34 IPC, against the present petitioner and his brother, Nizam Ahmed @ Bubu.

(3.) At the trial, when a charge, under Section 498A read with Section 34 IPC, was framed against both the accused persons aforementioned, both of them pleaded not guilty thereto.