Point of Law: Offence of Cruelty - Conviction affirmed - Scope of revisional jurisdiction this court is not inclined to interfere with impugned judgment of conviction of petitioner under section 498(A) of Indian Penal Code

JUDGMENT :

ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY, J.

1. Heard Mr. Pandey Neeraj Rai, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner assisted by Mr. Rohit Ranjan Sinha and Mr. Akchansh Kishore, Advocates.

2. Heard Mr. Tarun Kumar, the learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State-Opposite Party.

3. The petitioner, husband of the informant, has preferred the present criminal revision petition against his conviction and sentence under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code passed by the learned trial court and confirmed by the learned appellate court. All other accused family members of the petitioner i.e. mother-in-law and two sisters-in-law have been acquitted by the learned appellate court for alleged offence under section 498(A) of IPC and sections 3 and 4 of Dowry prohibition Act. The petitioner has also been acquitted for alleged offence under sections 3 and 4 of Dowry prohibition Act.

4. The Judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 23.06.2009 was passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Civil Court, Ghatsila in G.R. No. 326 of 1998/T.R. No. 122 of 2009. Altogether six accused had faced trial. Out of them four were family members of the informant:

Petitioner-husband of the complainant:

Mother-in-law of the informant - Ram Pyari Devi @ Ramdeiya Devi.

Two Sisters-in law of the informant namely Muniya Devi @ Meena and Phulpati Devi @ Phulmati Devi.

The remaining two were

Vishwanath Singh Yadav and Gopal Sharma, both friends of the petitioner.

5. The result of the trial is summarized as under:-

6. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with Judgment of conviction and the order of sentence, the petitioner alongwith his mother and two sisters preferred Criminal Appeal No. 184 of 2009 in which the learned appellate court vide Judgment dated 30.03.2012 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Ghatsila confirmed the conviction and sentence of the petitioner for the offence under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code only, but set aside the conviction and sentence of the petitioner under Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and also set aside the order directing the petitioner to pay compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- to the Informant and partly allowed the criminal appeal with respect to the petitioner. The learned appellate court also set aside the conviction and sentence of the mother and two sisters of the petitioner.

Arguments on behalf of the petitioner

7. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the husband of the Informant and his conviction under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code has been confirmed by the learned appellate court by recording specific findings at Para-32 of its judgment. He further submitted that the learned appellate court has recorded that the prosecution has been able to prove the allegation of subjecting the informant to cruelty by the husband and such allegation was supported by evidence of the informant PW-7 read with the evidence of PW-4, PW-5 and PW-6 who have supported the evidences of one another that husband used to assault the infor