Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
C. Praveen Kumar, B. Krishna Mohan, JJ.
Maddineni Venkata Vara Prasad, Hyd. – Petitioner
Versus
State of AP., Rep. PP. Hyd. – Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos.976 of 2014 and 1174 of 2014
Decided On : 23-09-2021
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 304B, 498A, 406, 306 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 431 –D.P. Act – Section 3 – Criminal Appeal – Harassment for dowry – Charge against accused is that A.1 to A.5 and A.7 subjected deceased to harassment for dowry, as a result of which she committed suicide in her parents house – It is also said that act of blackmailing by A.6 showing photographs and his demand of money from father of deceased, also made her to commit suicide – Held, Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of aforesaid discussion, we hold that contents of the death note Ex.P.2, as noted above may constitute an offence under Section 498A IPC against A.1 only, but not an offence under Section 304B IPC – For aforesaid reasons, conviction recorded against A.1 for offence punishable under Section 304B IPC is altered to one under Section 498A IPC – For altered conviction, A.1 is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years. Since A.1 has already undergone the imprisonment, he shall be given set off under Section 428 Cr.P.C. Consequently, A.1 shall be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case – Conviction recorded against A.6 for offence punishable under Section 306 IPC is also set aside and accordingly, he is acquitted for said offence – Criminal Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT :
C. Praveen Kumar, J.
Criminal Appeal No.1174 of 2014 is filed by A.1, while Criminal Appeal No.976 of 2014 is filed by A.6 against conviction and sentence passed in Sessions Case No.466 of 2010 on the file of I Additional Sessions Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District.
2. Originally, A.1 to A.7 were tried on six charges:
| Sl. | Charge | Against | Finding | Sentence |
| 1. | Sec.304B IPC | A1 to A.5 & A7 | (a) A1 is found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 304B IPC; | Imprisonment for life |
| (b) A2 to A5 & A7 are found not guilty for the offence punishable under Section 304B IPC; | ---- | |||
| 2. | Sec. 498A IPC | A1 to A5 & A7 | Found not guilty for the offence punishable under Section 498A IPC. | ---- |
| 3. | Sec. 406 IPC | A1 to A.5 | Found not guilty for the offence punishable under Section 406 IPC | ---- |
| 4. | Sec. 3 of D.P. Act | A1, A4 & A5 | Found not guilty for the offence punishable under Section 3 of D.P. Act | ---- |
| 5. | Sec. 4 of D.P. Act | A1, A4 & A5 | Found not guilty for the offence punishable under Section 3 of D.P. Act | ---- |
| 6. | Sec. 306 IPC | A6 | Guilty for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC. | Rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- IDSI, for six months. |
| Further, A.1 and A.6 were directed to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- each payable to PWs.1 and 2, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year each, imposed under Section 431 Cr.P.C. | ||||
Further, A.1 and A.6 were directed to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- each payable to PWs.1 and 2, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year each, imposed under Section 431 Cr.P.C.
3. The substance of the charge against the accused is that A.1 to A.5 and A.7 subjected the deceased Mohd. Suhela Akthar to harassment for dowry, as a result of which she committed suicide on 12.09.2008 in her parents house. It is also said that the act of blackmailing by A.6 showing the photographs and his demand of money from the father of the deceased, also made her to commit suicide.
4. The facts as culled out from the evidence of prosecution witnesses are as under
ii. PW.1 and 2 are parents of the deceased. PW.3 is younger brother of PW.1. PW.4 is the sister of PW.2 and PW.5 is the neighbour. PW.6 is Government Khazi who performed the marriage of deceased and A.1 on 22.04.2006 at Nellore. PW.7 is the tailor, who was present at the time of marriage talks between A.1 and the deceased.
iii. The marriage of A.1 with the deceased took place on 23.04.2006 at Nellore. At the time of marriage, PW.1 gave Rs.3.00 lakhs cash by way of Demand Drafts, 50 soverigens of gold ornaments, household articles worth Rs.1,50,000/-apart from Rs.60,000/-to A.1 for purchase of a motor cycle.
iv. After the marriage, the deceased joined A.1 at Chennai where they lived happily for some time. Thereafter, A.1 started demanding additional dowry and articles, which was informed by the deceased to her parents (PW.2). It is said that A.2 to A.5 and A.7 also harassed the deceased for dowry. PW.2 informed the same to PW.1, who approached A.3 and A.7, who acted as elders at the time of marriage. A.3 is said to have told PW.1 that if the marriage of A.1 was performed with some other girl, they would have got more dowry. PW.1 told them that he fulfilled all the terms agreed upon at the time of marriage, but A.3 is said to have stated that the articles given by them are not of standard quality.
v. In the month of November, 2006, PW.1 gave Rs.1,00,000/-, o
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
