Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Dr. Y. Lakshmana Rao, J
Peraipalli Suban Basha – Appellant
Versus
State Of A.P. – Respondent
ORDER:
Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J.
This Revision has been filed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘the Cr.P.C .’) challenging the judgment dated 05.05.2011 in Crl.A.No.55 of 2011 on the file of the learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Kurnool at Nandyal, whereby and whereunder the conviction and sentence of simple imprisonment for a term of one year and fine of Rs.5,000/- imposed for the offence punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity ‘the IPC’) by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Allagadda, in C.C.No.236 of 2008, dated 24.03.2011, was confirmed.
2. I have heard the arguents of Sri B.S. Reddy, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri K. Sandeep, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent.
3. The learned counsel for the revisionist, while reiterating the grounds raised in the revision, submitted that the learned Appellate Court failed to see that the evidence on record would not constitute any offence for the alleged offence charged; the evidence of PWs.1, 2 and 4 did not inspire any confidence; no independent witness was examined to corroborate the testimony of PW.1; PWs.3, 5 and 7,
The court affirmed that minor discrepancies in evidence do not invalidate a conviction under Section 498-A IPC, emphasizing the limited scope of revisional jurisdiction.
Petitioner acquitted of charges under Section 498A IPC due to insufficient evidence of cruelty, demonstrating the High Court's role in correcting procedural misjudgments.
The High Court's revisional jurisdiction is limited; it cannot convert an acquittal into a conviction without manifest illegality or miscarriage of justice.
The judgment emphasized the limitations of revisionary powers of the High Court under Section 401 of the Cr.P.C. and the prohibition on converting a finding of acquittal into one of conviction under ....
Possession of stolen property shortly after theft creates a presumption of guilt, requiring the accused to explain such possession.
The victim's right to file an appeal against the judgment of acquittal and the limited scope of interference in revisional jurisdiction against judgment of acquittal.
The court confirmed the conviction for negligence under Section 304-A IPC but reduced the sentence from one year rigorous imprisonment to three months simple imprisonment due to the Revisionist's age....
The judgment reaffirms that dowry-related cruelty under IPC Section 498A is a serious offense, validated by credible victim testimony and social realities of domestic abuse.
The conviction under IPC Section 498-A for cruelty does not require evidence of dowry harassment, as demonstrated by the victim's accounts of domestic abuse and intimidation.
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
