JUDGMENT :

A.V. RAVINDRA BABU, J.

1. This Criminal Appeal is filed by the appellants, who are the Accused No. 2 to Accused No. 4 in SC/ST Sessions Case No. 12 of 2008, on the file of Special Jude for Trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act-cum-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vizianagaram (hereinafter will be referred to “Special Judge”) challenging the judgment, dated 27.10.2010, where under the learned Special Judge while acquitting A.1 under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (“I.P.C.” for short) and A.2 to A.4 under Section 3(x)(i) of SC/ST (POA) Act and further acquitting A.2 to A.4 under Section 506(2) of I.P.C. but, found guilty of the present appellants under Section 498-A of I.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- each in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month each.

2. The parties to this Criminal Appeal will hereinafter be referred as described before the trial Court for the sake of convenience.

3. The SC/ST Sessions Case No. 12 of 2008 arose out of a committal order in P.R.C. No. 7 of 2005, on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Cheepurupalli, pertaining to Crime No. 17 of 2005 of Garividi Police Station.

4. The case of the prosecution, in brief, according to the contents of the charge sheet pertaining to Crime No. 17 of 2005 of Garividi Police Station is as follows:

(i) A.1 is the son of A.2 and A.3. A.4 is brother of A.2. All of them are Kapu by caste. LW-1 Geddapu Rama Laxmi, who is the daughter of LW-2 Damarasingi Chinnammalu and LW-3 Damarasingi Laxmana, belonged to SC (Mala) and they are residents of Geddapuvalasa village. A.1 fell in love with LW-1 and they eloped to Visakhapatnam on 13.03.2003. They were working as coolies at Visakhapatnam. Later, LW-4 Kumarapu Ramana, LW-6 Tummaganti Suri Naidu and one Geddapu Mahesh went to Visakhapatnam and brought back A.1 and LW-1 to Geddapuvalasa village. When a Panchayat was conducted before elders, A.1 and LW-1 did not agree to leave each other separately and they have gone to the extent of saying that they will commit suicide, if they are separated. A.2 and A.3 did not agree to perform the marriage of A.1 with LW-1, as they belongs to different caste. Hence, A.1 and LW-1 went back to Visakhapatnam.

(ii) On 06.06.2003 they married with each other at Simhachalam Devasthanam in the presence of their friends. Later, they went to Aruku and settled there by doing Charcole business. A.2 to A.4 went to Aruku twice or thrice and abused LW-1 and teased her stating that they lost lakhs of dowry because of her caste. On 17.09.2004 they went to Aruku and brought back A.1 on the pretext of signing in some LIC bond. Later, A.1 did not return back to Aruku. LW-1 lodged a complaint to Garividi Police Station. Police advised her on the point of jurisdiction to report the matter at Aruku, but, LW-1 did not lodge any report at Aruku. When she was at Geddapuvalasa, A.2 and A.3 abused her touching the name of her caste and demanded Rs. 1,00,000/- so as to enable A.1 to join her. They threatened to do harm, if she lodges any report. So, A.1 to A.4 subjected her to mental cruelty. Hence, the charge-sheet.

5. The learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Cheepurupalli, took cognizance for the offences under Sections 498-A and 506(2) of I.P.C. and Section 3(x)(i) of SC/ST (POA) Act and committed the case to the Special Court. After appearance of the accused before the learned Special Judge, charges under Sections 498-A and 506(2) of I.P.C. and Section 3(x)(i) of SC/ST (POA) Act, were framed against the accused and were explained in Telugu, for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. During the course of trial, on behalf of the prosecution, PW-1 to PW-12 were examined and Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.7 were marked. After closure of the evidence of the prosecution, accused were examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. with reference to the incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidenc