IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY THE THIRTYETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 9 9 of 2005 Between: Jarapala Surja Naik … Petitioner V/s. State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. Hyderabad … Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri C. Praveen Kumar Counsel for the Respondent : Public Prosecutor THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION No. 9 9 OF 2005 O R D E R : This Criminal Revision is directed against the conviction and sentence passed by the X-Additional District Judge (FTC) Guntur at Narsaraopet dated 27-1-2005 in Crl.A.No.446 of 2003, confirming the conviction and sentence recorded by the Munsif Magistrate, Vinukonda, in CC.No.775 of 2000, dated 10-11-2003, whereby and whereunder the petitioner-A1 was found guilty for the offence under section 498-A IPC and he was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for one year and also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for two months. 2. The brief facts of the case for the disposal of the present Criminal Revision Case are as follows : 3. The marriage of PW-1 was performed with A-1 in the month of May 2000 and at the time of marriage Rs.40,000/- cash and gold rings besides other household articles worth of Rs.3000/- were presented, A2 was also given ten tulas of silver anklets. After the marriage, PW-1 lived with A-1 for one month and subsequently at the instance of A-2 and A-3, A-1 used to ill-treat and harass PW-1 alleging that the dowry given was not sufficient and PW-1 is black in complexion and he sent her to her parents house attributing illicit intimacy with others. The elders in the Panchayat chastised the accused and thereupon PW-1 lived with the accused. While so, one week prior to 10-11-2000 at the instance of A2 and A3, A-1 threatened PW-1 and presuming that there is every chance of extracting more dowry in case PW-1 is finished, A-1 came with fire in plate and asked her to hold the same on the ground that she is having illicit intimacy and having afraid of the same, PW-1 ran out. Thereafter, PW-1 lodged a report and the same was registered as Cr.No.53/2000 for the offence under section 498-A IPC and took up investigation. . 3. On appearance of the accused, the learned Magistrate complied with the formalities as contemplated under section 207 Cr.P.C., and examined the accused under section 239 Cr.P.C. alleging the substance of accusation. The accused denied the substance of accusation. Charge under section 498-A of IPC was framed read over and explained to the accused in Telugu, for which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 4. To substantiate the case of the prosecution, the prosecution examined PWs.1 to 8 and got marked Exs.P1 to P-6 were marked. On behalf of the accused, no oral and documentary evidence was adduced. 5. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under section 313 Cr.P.C., for the incriminating evidence appearing against him. Accused denied the same. 6. Upon consideration of oral and documentary evidence placed on record, the trial court found the petitioner-A1 guilty of the offences under section 498-A of IPC and he was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for one year and also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for two months. 7. On appeal, the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Magistrate were confirmed by the learned X- Additional Sessions Judge, Narsaraopet, in Crl.A.No. 446 of 2003, dated 27-1-2005. Challenging the same, the present Criminal Revision is filed. 8. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has confined his arguments only in connection with the sentence and submitted that being the offence pertaining to the year 2000 and the petitioner has already undergone pre-trial detention, therefore, he further prayed mercy of this Court. 9. Considering the fact that the offence is pertaining to the year 2000 i.e., after a lapse of one decade, the petitioner has been suffering untold hardship to eke out his livelihood and to maintain his family at a subsistence level. 10. Considering the same, the conviction recorded by both the courts below is confirmed and sentence is modified to the period already undergone and the fine amount paid by the petitioner shall remain unaltered. 11. With the above modification in the sentence, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of. __________________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO. 30-09-2010 I s L THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 9 9 OF 2005 Circulation Entry No. 3 5 Date: 30-09-2010 Computer No. 43 Court Master: I s L