IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY THE EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMGBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 104 OF 2003 Between: The State of Andhra Pradesh Represented by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad … appellant V/s. Saga Narender @ Narahari & 3-Ors. … Respondents Counsel for the appellant : Addl.Public Prosecutor Counsel for the Respondents : Sri I.GopalReddy The court made the following : (judgment follows 2nd page) THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 104 OF 2003 JUDGMENT : The State preferred this criminal appeal against the order of acquittal recorded by the XXII Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court, Hyderabad in CC.No.31 of 1999, dated 07-10-2002, whereby and whereunder A-1 to A-4 were found not guilty for the offences under section 498-A IPC and section 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act and further A-1 and A-4 were found not guilty for the offence under section 494 IPC and A-2 and A-3 were found not guilty for the offence under section 494 IPC read with 109 IPC and they were acquitted under section 248 (1) Cr.P.C. 2. At the hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that he is not pressing the appeal for A-2 to A-4, more particularly for the offences punishable under section 494 IPC and section 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act in view of lack of evidence. He pressed the criminal appeal in respect of A-1, who is the husband of the defacto complainant. Since there is ample evidence to attract the offence punishable under section 498-A IPC in view of the fact that PW-1 deposed before the Court that A-1 demanded Rs.10,000/- and for which she was driven out from the matrimonial home. PW-1 has categorically stated in her evidence before the trial court. 3. This Court perused the entire evidence and also the judgment of the trial court. Admittedly, PW-1 left matrimonial home in the year 1994 and whereas the complaint was lodged in 1998 after knowing the fact that A-1 performed second marriage. In the said complaint as well as in the evidence adduced before the trial court, PW-1 had stated that accused demanded a sum of Rs.10,000/- and harassed her. Except that there is no specific allegation. The said allegation is vague in nature and it can be called as bald allegation. There is no specific date and incident mentioned by PW-1. In the absence of examination of any panchayatdars as alleged by the prosecution some mediations were taken place in connection with the said harassment. 4. When it is the specific case of the prosecution that some mediators were involved in the issue. If that be so, it is the duty of the prosecution to examine them to support their contention. In the absence of any such evidence adduced merely on the basis of the evidence adduced by PW-1, which is vague in nature, the learned Magistrate acquitted the respondent from all the charges. This Court on perusal of the record and also discussions as stated hereinabove is of the view that there is no need to interfere with the order of acquittal recorded by the learned Magistrate. 5. Accordingly, the criminal appeal fails and the same is dismissed. __________________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO. 08-12-2010 I s L THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 104 OF 2004 Circulation No.64 Date:08-12-2010 Court Master : I s L Computer No. 43