HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRL.RC. NO.51 OF 2005 Date:26.03.2010. Between: Bommadi Parsharamulu and 2 others …..Petitioners/Appellants/Accused And: The State of AP, rep. by its PP …..Respondent. HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRL.R.C. NO.51 OF 2005 ORDER: The accused Nos.1 to 3 (A-1 to A-3) are the Revision Petitioners. A-1 is son of A-2 and A-3. They were charged with offences under Sections 498-A, 306 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The trial court i.e., the Assistant Sessions Judge, Huzurabad in Sessions Case No.1202 of 2004 found them not guilty of offence under Section 306 IPC, but they were found guilty of offences under Section 498-A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Accordingly, the trial court convicted A-1 to A-3 for the said offences and sentenced them to Rigorous Imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs.2,000/- each for offence under Section 498-A IPC; and Simple Imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs.1,000/- each for offence under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. On appeal, in Criminal Appeal No.28 of 2004, the III Additional Sessions Judge, Karimnagar confirmed the said convictions and sentences passed by the trial court. A-1 to A-3 are questioning the same herein. A-1 married the victim woman/deceased Swaroopa @ Vasantha in the year 1992. It is alleged that parents of the deceased agreed to give Rs.30,000/- and 4 tolas of gold as dowry and they could pay only Rs.30,000/- in cash and two and half tolas of gold at the time of marriage and promised to give balance of one and half tolas of gold subsequently. Both the couple led marital life happily for two years. It is alleged that subsequently A-1 to A-3 began ill-treating and harassing the deceased for the sake of balance of dowry of one and half tolas of gold and that the deceased committed suicide on 11.05.2000 by consuming poison because she was unable to bear harassment of A-1 to A-3. P.W.1 is mother of the deceased. P.W.1 lodged report with the police who registered the same, investigated into it and filed charge sheet. During trial, apart from P.W.1, brother of the deceased was examined as P.W.2 and younger brother of P.W.1 was examined as P.W.3. P.Ws.5 and 6 are mediators in the panchayats. It is their evidence that the deceased was informing them in panchayat about harassment of A-1 to A-3 towards her. Believing evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3, 5 and 6, the courts below found A-1 to A-3 guilty of the above offences. It is contended by the petitioners’ counsel that for the sake of alleged balance of dowry of one and half tolas of gold, it would be difficult to believe that A-1 to A-3 harassed the victim woman even after 12 years of marriage. No doubt, even before the mediators, P.Ws.4 and 5 the deceased did not give balance of dowry of one and half tolas of gold as the reason for A-1 to A-3 harassing her. According to P.W.5, the deceased informed him about A-1 to A-3 harassing her on the ground that she was not attending to work. On two occasions, there were panchayats and on both the occasions, A-1 to A-3 promised to look after the deceased well. It is also complaint of the deceased before P.W.1 as well as the mediators that when she was suffering from fever, A-1 to A-3 did not provide her with medical aid. It is also complaint of the deceased to them that A-1 was beating her. It is evidence of P.W.1 that A-1 beat the deceased on the ground that she complained against the accused to her people and village elders. It is evidence of P.W.6 that the deceased informed them that A-1 was harassing her as she was not blessed with children and also demanding additional dowry from her parents. Demand for additional dowry, is nobody’s case. Ex.P-4 is compromise said to have been reduced into writing in the mediation. Ex.P-4 was signed by A-1 and A-2 as well as the deceased. It was also signed by P.Ws.5 and 6 and other elders. P.Ws.1 to 3 also signed in it. It was decided as per Ex.P-4 that the deceased has to hear what was stated to her by A-2 and A-3 and should live amicably with A-1 and that in case the deceased committed any thing wrong, then she has to go away to her mother’s house and that in case A-1 commits any wrong, then he has to pay Rs.40,000/- as penality. In Ex.P-4, there is nothing about any demand for payment of balance of dowry of one and half tolas of god. Tenor of Ex.P-4 is that both the parties complained against each other in the mediation. That was the reason why the mediators imposed condition not only against A-1 but also against the deceased. Except minor disputes between the parties, there appears to be no major disputes between them. It is contended by the petitioners’ counsel that the deceased might have committed suicide as she was unhappy because she could not beget children even after 12 years of her marital life. If really the differences were due to non payment of one and half tolas of gold, it would have been finalised by paying the same; and it would not have taken 12 years after marriage for such payment. Effect and tenor of Ex.P-4 was overlooked by both the courts below. It resulted in gross miscarriage of justice in this case. It is evident that both the courts below were carried away by the fact that the victim committed suicide. It follows that findings of the courts below on both the charges are vitiated, resulting in gross miscarriage of justice. In the result, the Revision Petition is allowed setting aside convictions and sentences passed by the courts below against the petitioners 1 to 3/A-1 to A-3 and acquitting them. ____________________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU,J. Date:26.03.2010. HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDA RAJULU CRL.RC. NO.51 OF 2005 Date:26.03.2010. Gk.