The quality of witness testimony and the interpretation of the Act's amendment influenced the Court's decision.

G.Jayachandran, J.

The revision petitioner herein is the accused tried for the offence under Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act.

2. The de facto complainant, viz., Kala, is a deserted woman living separately. The revision petitioner herein, who is a distance relative of the de facto complainant, had proposed her for live in relationship, which has been repealed by her. However, with a wrong intention, he had frequently harassed her and also offered indecent proposals.

3. On 18.01.2010, at about 05.00 p.m., while the defacto complainant and her aunty were standing near Murugankurichi bus stop, it is alleged that the revision petitioner made some comment, which has caused mental agony to the defacto complainant. Hence, she lodged a complaint before the Thiruchendur Police Station. The said complaint has been taken on file in C.C.No.81 of 2010. After investigation, the respondent Police has filed a final report. To prove charge, the prosecution has examined six witnesses and marked six exhibits.

4. The defacto complainant, who is the victim, has spoken about the harassment and the incident as found in the complaint. Her mother was examined as P.W.2, who is not an witness to the occurrence, but heard about the occurrence. P.W.2, Palkani, who according to the defacto complainant was present at the time of occurrence, has turned hostile. Other two witnesses P.Ws.4 & 5, who are villagers, have not supported the case of the prosecution.

5. The trial Court, however, relying upon the deposition of the victim as reliable and genuine, found that the accused was guilty and convicted him to undergo two years R.I and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- i/d six months S.I. under Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment Act.

6. Aggrieved by the same, the defacto complainant has preferred an appeal before the II Additional Sessions Judge, Thoothukudi. The learned Appellate Court, after considering the material evidence and the submissions made by the accused, confirmed the conviction and modified the sentence to that effect that he shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-. The present Revision Petition is directed against the said modified judgment of the Appellate Court.

7. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that P.W.1 is an interested witness, she and her family members had some money transaction with the accused. Pursuant to the quarrel in re-payment, a false complaint has been lodged by the P.W.1 and the same was supported by P.W.2, who is the mother of the defacto complainant. Even though an eye witness to the incident, who is none other than the maternal aunt of P.W.1, has not supported the case of the P.W.1, which would go to show that the complaint has been the shoot out of money dispute and really there is no harassment to the P.W.1. The learned counsel would point out certain portion of the deposition made by P.Ws.1 and 2 wherein, it is stated on behalf of the accused that the accused and the defacto complainant's family had money transaction.

8. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that the victim girl had deposed about the manner in which the accused initially behaved with her and later stated about the harassment. He also submitted that parties are being relatives and there is no necessity for P.W.1 to make void allegation against the accused. The Courts below have properly appreciated the evidence let in by the prosecution. P.W.1 is the reliable witness, who is the victim lady, had faced the harassment at the hands of the accused and she has come forward to protest the same. Therefore, the judgment of the Court below is liable to be confirmed.

9. The submissions of the respective counsels and the records are considered.

10. P.W.1 is a lady and she was deserted by her husband, so living alon