DUBAGUNTA SUBRAHMANYAM, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision is filed against the judgment dated 8-3-2001 in Criminal Appeal no. 179 of 1997 on the file of VI Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, secunderabad, confirming the conviction under Section 498-A, I. P. C. , and modifying the sentence of imprisonment in C. C. No. 455 of 1995 on the file of XXII Metropolitan magistrate, Hyderabad by her judgment dated 22-4-1997. The first accused filed this revision.

( 2 ) NECESSARY facts for the disposal of this revision petition are as follows: p. W. 1 is the father of P. W. 2. He is a retired senior Government official. He performed the marriage of his daughter P. W. 2 with first accused on 30-12-1988. After marriage, P. W. 2 joined her husband at his residence and lived there for a short period only. For the purpose of disposal of this revision, the version of the prosecution regarding giving dowry, etc. , at the time of marriage of P. W. 2 need not be mentioned. It is the version of the prosecution that on demand by the members of the family of the first accused, a sum of Rs. 5,000=00 was given by her parents on 11-4-1989. It is also the case of the prosecution that on 10-5-1989 A-1 and other members of his family beat P. W. 2 and necked her out of their house directing her to bring a sum of Rs. 25,000=00 from her parents for the purpose of making additional construction on the first floor of the house of the accused. According to the prosecution, P. W. 2 reached her parents house, her father P. W. 1 was not present at the house at that time, with her mother she went to the Police Station, she was sent by police to Osmania General Hospital accompanied by two lady constables and she was examined by Medical Officer P. W. 3 and she issued the wound certificate Ex. P-15 regarding the injuries found on the person of P. W. 2. It is also the further case of the prosecution that after P. W. 1 reached his house, he learnt that his wife and P. W. 2 went to the Police Station, he went to the Police Station and learnt that she was sent to the hospital. It is also the further case of the prosecution that on 14-5-1989 A-1 s father, namely, A-2 entered into compromise and promised to take P. W. 2 to their residence and treat her properly and he also gave a letter Ex. P-4 to the police about his undertaking. According to the prosecution as P. W. 2 was pregnant at that time, A-2 asked P. W. 1 to keep P. W. 2 for sometime at his residence and promised to take her back after sometime and, thereafter they did not take back P. W. 2 to their residence. It is also the version of the prosecution that on 2-10-1989 A-1 and A-2 jointly gave another undertaking Ex. P-7 to the police assuring that they will take back P. W. 2 and treat her properly. P. W. 2 delivered a baby and subsequently that baby became sick and P. W. 1 went to the house of the accused and informed them about the sickness of the baby. P. W. 1 was beaten by the members of accused family and he gave a report to the police about the injuries sustained by him. In this revision we are not concerned with this incident. P. W. 1 gave a complaint Ex. P-10 on 9-9-1990 to the police requesting them to take action against the accused for the offences under Section 498-A, I. P. C. , and Sections 3 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The police registered F. I. R. , investigated into the matter and filed a charge-sheet against the accused. The learned Magistrate framed a charge under Section 498-A, I. P. C. , read with Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and another charge under Section 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act against A-1 and A-2. Both the accused pleaded not guilty to the charges framed against them. The prosecution examined P. Ws. 1 to 4 and marked Exs. P-1 to P-16 on their behalf. The accused did not examine any defence witness. One document was marked on their behalf as Ex. D-1. P. W. 2 filed a petition under Section 125, Cr. P. C. , in M. C. No. 19 of 1991 against her husband - A-1 seeking maintenance. She gave

Click Here to Read the rest of this document