HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRL.R.C.No.436 of 2004 JUDGMENT: This criminal revision case is directed against the judgment of the learned III-Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.II) Khammam, in Crl.A.No.24 of 2001, dated 10.03.2004 confirming the conviction and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and fine of Rs.200/-, in default, simple imprisonment for a period of 15 days for the offence punishable under Section 498-A of I.P.C. imposed against the revision petitioner-A1 by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Khammam in S.C.No.155 of 1999 dated 29.01.2001. The brief facts of the case are that the daughter of P.W.1 i.e., Gousiya Bee was given in marriage to the revision petitioner- A1 about 5 years prior to her death and at the time of marriage, the parents of said Ghousiya Bee gave Rs.6,000/- as dowry even though they agreed to pay Rs.10,000/-. Thereafter, said Gousiya Bee joined A1 and led marital life for about three years. However, A1 started harassing and beating the said Gousiya Bee on hearing the words of A-2 that she was moving with other male persons and talking with them. Thereafter, on 08.08.1998 at 3 P.M. the said Gousiya Bee consumed pesticide in the house of the accused and while undergoing treatment, she died. Subsequently P.W.1 lodged a complaint before the police and basing on which a case in Crime No. 118 of 1998 was registered under Sections 498-A and 306 of I.P.C. and the accused were tried for the said offences. The prosecution has examined P.Ws.1 to 9 and got marked Exs.P1 to P9 to prove the guilt of the accused. On a perusal of the entire evidence, both oral and documentary, the trial Court, while acquitting A2 of the offences with which he was charged and A1 for the offence punishable under Section 306 of I.P.C., found the A1 guilty of the offence punishable under Section 498-A of I.P.C. and accordingly convicted and sentenced him as stated supra. In an appeal preferred by the revision petitioner-A1 against the said conviction and sentence, the learned III-Additional Sessions Judge, Khammam, confirmed the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court. Aggrieved by the same, the revision petitioner-A1 preferred this criminal revision. Heard both sides. Having considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner and having perused the judgments delivered by both the Courts below, this Court of the view that the Courts below have rightly applied its mind and came to the conclusion that the revision petitioner-A1 was guilty of the offence punishable under Section 498-A of I.P.C. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has also not shown me anything which would discredit the evidence. Hence the conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court as well as the appellate Court against the revision petitioner- A1 is upheld. I see no merit in the revision. As regards the sentence, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner that the revision petitioner-A1 had undergone substantive sentence of imprisonment during the course of trial and also after the appellate Court pronounced the judgment and hence the sentence may be reduced to the period already undergone by him. The submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner appears to be correct. The appeal was dismissed on 10.3.2004 and immediately the petitioner was taken into custody. Thereafter, in this revision, the petitioner was granted bail by this Court on 15.03.2004. As an under trial prisoner, according to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner was in jail for about 15 days. Since the occurrence took place as early as in the year 1998 and the revision petitioner had already undergone the sentence of about thirty days, this Court is of the view that it is suffice to reduce the sentence of imprisonment of one year, as was imposed by the Courts below, to that of the period already undergone by the revision petitioner-A1, while maintaining the sentence of fine imposed against him. The petitioner is directed to be set at liberty forthwith if not required in any other crime With the above modification in the sentence, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. _______________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 04.06.2010 Gsn.