JUDGMENT :

PRAYER: Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374 (2) of Cr.P.C., to set aside the judgment and conviction passed in S.C.No.75 of 2016 dated 05.02.2020 on the file of the Learned Sessions Judge Mahila Court, Mahalir Neethimandram Coimbatore and allowing the appeal throughout by acquitting the appellant.

This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgement of the Learned Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram, Coimbatore passed in S.C.No.75 of 2016, dated 05/02/2020.

2. The appellant herein is the sole accused who faced trial for the charges under Section 498(A) I.P.C. and 306 I.P.C. To prove the case, the prosecution has examined 12 witnesses and marked 22 exhibits. On the side of the defence, the accused has examined six witnesses and marked 19 exhibits. On appreciation of the evidence, the trial Court found the accused not guilty of offence under Section 498 (A) I.P.C. and acquitted him. However, the trial Court found him guilty for the offence under section 306 I.P.C., convicted and sentenced him to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment and with fine of Rs.5,000/- in default, to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment. The period of sentence already undergone was ordered to be set off under section 482 Cr.P.C.

3. The case of the prosecution briefly runs as under:-

On 24/10/2007, Mr. Shanmuganand (for convenience herein after to be referred as the appellant) married Sujatha (for convenience hereinafter to be referred as the deceased). At the time of marriage, they both were employed in two different Private Companies at Chennai, they settled their matrimonial home at Chennai. The marital relationship between them was never cordial. It was full of harassment and cruelty by the appellant and his family members. The deceased was subjected to torture physically and was not allowed to talk with her family members. Meanwhile, the deceased gave birth to a female child. However, the torture by the appellant continued and when this was informed to the family members of the deceased, they came to Chennai and tried to pacify the appellant. In course of the talk, the father of the deceased was physically manhandled by the appellant leading to a police complaint. During the month of February 2010, after lodging a complaint to the Commissioner of police at Chennai, the deceased was taken to Hyderabad by her parents. In July 2010, the deceased filed divorce petition in the Court at Chennai, on the ground of cruelty. In the month of October 2010, when the deceased and her mother came to Chennai to attend the Court and where at Central Railway Station on their return to Coimbatore, the appellant with intention to prevent them from returning back to Coimbatore came to the Railway Station and attacked them. In this connection, a complaint was registered by the Railway Police against the appellant and he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody.

4. Thereafter, the elders from both the families compromised them and settled the matter between them facilitating reunion. As a result, in April 2011, the family was shifted from Chennai to Coimbatore. They setup the family at Shinganallur with the parents of the appellant. Both husband and wife got transfer from Chennai to join job at Coimbatore. While so, the deceased got conceived but she was asked to abort since the appellant family felt that it could be a female baby. The deceased refused to abort the child, called her parents and went with them for the safety of herself and the child in the womb. The deceased was attending a office staying at her parents house in Ganapathy Nagar, Coimbatore along with her daughter. At the request of the appellant, the deceased used to take her daughter to her husband’s house at Shinganallur during weekends, leave the daughter with him to spend the weekend and bring her back.

5. On 26/04/2013, she went to the appellant’s house along with the child, left the child with the appellant and returned. But, on that day, at about 9.45 p.m her mother Ranjitham r