AMPOLU VENKATA RAMANA Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the judgment of the learned I-Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, in Crl.A.No.216 of 2004, dtd. 20.06.2006, whereby the learned Judge, while setting aside the conviction and sentence imposed against the revision petitioner-A1 for the offence punishable under Sec. 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, reduced the sentence of rigorous imprisonment of one year six months imposed against the revision petitioner-A1 for the offence punishable under Sec. 498-A of I.P.C., by the learned XXII Metropolitan Magistratecum-Mahila Court, Hyderabad, in C.C.No.185 of 2000, dtd. 14.07.2004, to one year rigorous imprisonment without disturbing the fine amount imposed against him.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the marriage of the petitionerA1 and P.W.1 took place on 15.02.1997 as per the Hindu Rites and Customs and at the time of marriage, the parents of P.W.1 gave an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and 7 tulas of gold and 10 tulas of silver ornaments towards dowry apart from household articles worth Rs.25,000/- to A-1. It is stated that since the date of marriage, on the instigation of other accused, A-1 started harassing her both mentally and physically and necked her out of their house for additional dowry. After giving birth to a female child, the accused did not allow P.W.1 to lead matrimonial life with A-1 and in the panchayat, the accused stated that if P.W.1 brings the additional dowry amount of Rs.5.00 lakhs from her parents, they will allow her to lead matrimonial life with A-1. Hence, P.W.1 lodged the complaint before the police, basing on which a case in Crime No.23 of 2000 was registered against the accused for the offences punishable under Sec. 498-A of I.P.C. and Sections 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Again, on 03.02.2000, P.W.1 came to the police Station and lodged additional complaint stating that A-1 had his first wife with two children and without disclosing the same, he married her. The police, after completion of investigation, filed a charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 495 of I.P.C. and Sections 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

(3.) The prosecution has examined P.Ws.1 to 6 and got marked Exs.P1 and P9 to prove the guilt of the accused. On behalf of the accused, neither oral nor documentary evidence was adduced. On a perusal of the entire evidence, both oral and documentary, the trial Court, while acquitting A-4 and A-5 for the offences with which they were charged, found the revision petitioner-A1 guilty of the offences punishable under Sec. 498-A of I.P.C. and Sec. 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and accordingly convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence punishable under Sec. 498-A of I.P.C. and also to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence punishable under Sec. 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. However, the revision petitioner-A1 was found not guilty of the offence punishable under Sec. 495 of I.P.C. and Sec. 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and accordingly he was acquitted for the said charges.