HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No: 703 OF 2004 Dated 16-6-2010 Between: Lankalapalli Vasraprasadarao. …Petitioner. And: The Station House Officer, Kovvuru Rural Police Station, Kovvuru, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. …Respondent. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No: 703 OF 2004 ORDER: Aggrieved by the judgment passed on 8-4-2004 in Criminal Appeal No.232 of 2000 by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, West Godavari District, Eluru, while confirming the conviction against the petitioner-A.1 and acquitting A.2 to A.6 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kovvur, West Godavari District, in C.C.No.274 of 1995 for the offence under Sections 420 and 406 I.P.C., on 20-9-2000, the present revision case is preferred by the petitioner. Petitioner herein is A.1 before the Court below. The facts leading to file the present revision case are in a nutshell as follows: P.W.1 is the legally wedded wife of A.1. A.2 and A.3 are the in- laws of P.W.1. A.4 and A.5 are the cousins of the father-in-law of P.W.1. A.6 is the brother of A.1’s 1st wife (died). The marriage of P.W.1 with A.1 took place on 7-12-1994. At the time of marriage, P.W.2, the father of P.W.1 gave an amount of Rs.20,000/- to the accused and P.W.1 was presented with 10 sovereigns of gold jewellery besides 67 cents of land towards pasupukunkuma. After marriage, P.W.1 joined A.1 and they lived happily for some time. Subsequently, A.1 sold the gold jewellery given to her for his bad vices. A.1 developed illicit intimacy with one Ramalatha and used to bring her to the house. A.1 insisted P.W.1 to render services to her. A.2 to A.6 instigated A.1 to demand P.W.1 to sell 67 cents of land conveyed to her. In the month of April, 1993, A.1 performed the marriage of his eldest daughter born through his first wife. In that marriage, A.1 performed all the customary ceremonies along with his concubine by neglecting P.W.1. When P.W.1 and her father questioned the accused, he necked out them from the house. They raised a dispute before the elders. P.Ws. 2 to 5 intervened and settled the matter. When P.W.1 questioned A.1 about his illicit intimacy with Ramalatha, he used to beat her. At the instance of A.2 to A.6, he necked her out from the house. She raised a dispute before the elders. A.1 got issued a notice to P.W.1 for restitution of conjugal rights and with an intention to harass her, he filed O.P.No.2 of 1995 before the Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram and obtained divorce. She filed a private complaint before the I Class Magistrate Court, Kovvur and the same was forwarded to police. Police took up investigation and after investigation, filed the charge sheet against the petitioner and others for the offence under Section 498-A, 420 and 406 I.P.C. read with Sections 109 and 34 I.P.C. Before the trial Court, on behalf of the prosecution, P.Ws.1 to 8 were examined and Exs.P.1 to P.8 were marked. On behalf of the defence, D.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and no Exhibits were marked. The trial Court having observed that the prosecution has proved the guilty of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt that the petitioner and A.2 to A.6 harassed P.W.1 at the instigation of A.2 to A.6, convicted and sentenced them to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 6 months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default S.I. for two months each, for the offence under Section 498-A I.P.C. while acquitting them under Section 420 and 406 I.P.C. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner and A.2 to A.6 filed an appeal before the 1st appellate Court and the 1st appellate Court after reappreciation of evidence available on record, confirmed the conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial Court against the petitioner-A.1 only while acquitting A.2 to A.6 for the offence under Section 498-A I.P.C. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision has been preferred by the petitioner. Heard the learned Counsel and perused the judgments impugned. In the earlier occasion, the defacto complainant-petitioner herein filed a compromise memo by way of filing affidavit in which the defacto complainant stated as follows: “Be that as it may, in the month of June, 2004, there was a meeting between elders of both sides and conciliation proceedings took place in the last week of June, 2004. Since then myself and my husband living together without there being any single incident, leading happy life. For the last six (6) months we have been peacefully living and I satisfied that there is a lot of change in my husband’s attitude and I wanted to withdraw the case and the same may be compounded. Hence this petition is filed.” The matter was posted for consideration but unfortunately, the same was not listed for a long time. Today, it is listed for final hearing. Considering the affidavit filed by the defacto complainant and the contents thereof, I feel it a fit case wherein this Revision filed by the petitioner-A.1 can be allowed and in view of the compromise entered into between the parties, which is in nature of compounding offence under Section 320 Cr.P.C., the petitioner- accused is acquitted from all the charges levelled against him. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed. __________________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Dated 16-06-2010. Dvs HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No: 703 OF 2004 Dated 16-06-2010