The court emphasized the necessity of clear and corroborative evidence to establish charges under Sections 498-A and 494 IPC, reversing the appellate court's conviction due to lack of proof and adherence to legal standards.

JUDGMENT :

BIBEK CHAUDHURI, J.

1. The instant Criminal Revision is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 05.09.2024 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Samastipur in Criminal Appeal No. 02 of 2023, whereby the learned appellate court set aside the judgment of acquittal dated 30.11.2022 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rosera in Trial No. 1247 of 2022 arising out of Rosera P.S. Case No. 103 of 2018, and convicted the petitioner under Sections 498 -A and 494 of the Indian Penal Code, sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment of three years and fine of Rs.10,000/- under each section, with further stipulation of default imprisonment of one year. Both sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the aforementioned judgment of reversal, has instituted the instant revision petition under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter “CrPC”), thereby calling into question the legality, correctness, and propriety of the conviction and the sentence imposed by the appellate court.

3. That the present case arises out of Rosera Police Station Case No. 103 of 2018, registered on the basis of a written complaint dated 1^st April 2018 by Opposite Party No. 2, Nutan Devi. In her complaint, she avers that she is the lawful wife of the Petitioner, Anil Kumar, having been married to him on 16 April 2004 according to Hindu rites and customs. She further pleads that over the years matrimonial relations between them broke down. Without obtaining any decree of divorce, the Petitioner is alleged to have solemnized a second marriage with one Kanti Kumari. It is her case that during the subsistence of her marriage with the Petitioner she was subjected to cruelty and she was driven out of the matrimonial home. In her deposition she alleged, despite the interim maintenance ordered in Maintenance Case No. 111 of 2016, she was denied maintenance and further she received threats to her life, which compelled her to approach the police.

4. Based on these allegations, an FIR was registered against the petitioner under Sections 498 -A and 494 of the Indian Penal Code. After investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted, and the petitioner was put on trial before the court of learned SDJM, Rosera.

5. During the trial, ten witnesses were examined, seven for the prosecution and three for the defence. After a full hearing and careful evaluation of all evidence, the learned trial court acquitted the petitioner by a detailed judgment dated 30^th November 2022, holding that the prosecution had failed to establish the charges beyond reasonable doubt.

6. Subsequent to the acquittal by the learned trial court, the informant, Nutan Devi, (O.P. No. 2, herein) preferred Criminal Appeal No. 02 of 2023 before the learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Samastipur. Upon hearing both sides and re-evaluating the evidence, the appellate court reversed the acquittal and convicted the petitioner under both Sections 498 -A and 494 of the Indian Penal Code, imposing the sentence as aforesaid.

7. Aggrieved by the appellate court's reversal of acquittal, the petitioner has filed the instant revision under Sections 397 and 401 o