JUDGMENT :

R. Banumathi, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal arises out of the Order of the Karnataka High Court in Crl. R.P. No. 2148 of 2010 dated 29.10.2013, confirming the conviction of the Appellant under Section 498 A Indian Penal Code and reducing the sentence of imprisonment of one year to six months and enhancing the fine amount from Rs. 3000/- to Rs. 10,000/- and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for two months.

3. Brief facts of the case are that, the Appellant-first accused is the husband of PW-1, Smt. Noorunnisa and their marriage was solemnized on 06.02.1994 and the couple has two daughters and one son. Sometime after the marriage, accused No. 1 started physically torturing PW-1, and subjected her to cruelty by assaulting her and demanded/dowry of Rs. 50,000/- or a house from her parents. On 25.05.2001, at about 9.30 p.m., when PW-1 was in the house situated at Gandhi Nagar, Bellary, the Appellant abused PW-1 and her father PW-2 in filthy language and Appellant pushed PW-2 and voluntarily caused simple hurt to him. Father of the Appellant-accused No. 2 is alleged to have committed criminal intimidation by threatening PW-2 with dire consequences. At the time of marriage of Appellant and PW-1, the Appellant and Accused No. 2- father of the Appellant are said to have accepted dowry of Rs. 50,000/-, gold, silver, clothes etc. and further alleged to have harassed PW-1 demanding more dowry from her parents. On the complaint lodged by PW-1, case was registered against the Appellant and his father under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 Indian Penal Code read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. On completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the Appellant and his father.

4. In order to prove the case of the prosecution, the prosecution has examined 17 witnesses - PW-1 to PW-17 and marked documents Exts. P1 to P11. The accused were questioned under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure about the incriminating evidence and they denied all of them. Upon consideration of the evidence, the trial court convicted the Appellant and his father for various offences and imposed imprisonment/fine as under:

Total fine amount of Rs. 9,000/- was ordered to be paid as compensation to the complainant.

5. Being aggrieved, the Appellant and his father S. Vali Sab preferred appeal before the Additional District and Sessions Court, Bellary (Fast Track Court-I). The appellate court set aside the conviction of Appellant's father S. Vali Sab and acquitted him of all the charges. The conviction of the Appellant-accused No. 1 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and sentence of imprisonment and fine imposed on him was confirmed. Being aggrieved, the Appellant preferred criminal revision before the High Court. The High Court confirmed the conviction of the Appellant under Section 498A Indian Penal Code and reduced the sentence of imprisonment of one year to six months and enhanced the fine to Rs. 10,000/-. The High Court acquitted the Appellant of the charges under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

6. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the Appellant and the complainant led peaceful and harmonious life and the couple are having two daughters and one son and the charges of ill-treatment to the complainant-wife are false and concocted, such allegations being made only out of anger and frustration, as the Appellant had married second time in the year 2001 and was living with his second wife. It was further submitted that the trial court convicted the Appellant only on the basis of the evidence of PW-1(wife), PW-2 (younger brother), PW-4 (mother of PW-1) and other interested witnesses and their evidence do not inspire confidence of the court and the learned courts below ought not to have based the conviction on such interested testimony.

7. Learned Counsel for the Respondent-Sta