The main legal point established in the judgment is that the accused's dishonest inducement of the victim to believe in false promises of marriage constituted the offence of cheating under Section 417 IPC.

JUDGMENT :

G. RADHA RANI, J.

1. This appeal is preferred by the appellant/accused aggrieved by the conviction and sentence recorded by the Special Sessions Judge-cum-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District vide orders in S.C. No. 63 of 2010 dated 28.08.2021 imposing a sentence to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence under Section 417 IPC.

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, as per the charge-sheet filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Saroornagar Division, Cyberabad was that the complainant, who was the mother of the victim women came to the Police Station, Vanasthalipuram, on 29.12.2009 at 1.00 P.M. and lodged a report that her daughter R. Ashalatha, Woman Home Guard-1051 was working in Woman P.S. Saroornagar. The accused, who was working as P.C. 499 in bomb diffusal team dog squad, Amberpet, induced her daughter by promising to marry representing that he was an unmarried person and set up marital life in a room at Amberpet and had been leading marital life with her since 2008. Thereafter, they came to know that he was already married and was having two children. When the complainant and her daughter enquired with the accused he informed that his wife was mentally retorted and promised to marry the daughter of complainant with the consent of his wife. But unfortunately the wife of the accused died. He got vacated the house at Amberpet, shifted to Vanasthalipuram and staying in a house representing to the locality people that they were husband and wife and were leading marital life. Out of suspicion that he might deceive her daughter, her brother-in-law brought an alliance to her daughter and they also fixed an engagement date but the accused came to the house of complainant’s brother-in-law and requested him to stop the engagement promising that he would marry the daughter of complainant in April, 2010. But later, the accused demanded dowry of Rs. 3,00,000/- to marry the complainant’s daughter and refused to marry her otherwise. The daughter of the complainant explained that they could not afford such huge amount of dowry. While so, on 19.11.2009 the accused married another woman. When contacted on phone he informed that he was forced to marry under unavoidable circumstances and further promised to look after her daughter and also marry her as a second wife. When the complainant refused for the second marriage, he threatened her to do whatever she could do.

3. Based on the said report, Police registered a case in Crime No. 767 of 2009 under Section 420 IPC. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer on coming to know that the victim woman belonged to SC community and the accused belonged to BC community, added Section 3(1)(xii) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 (for short “the Act”) and handed over further investigation to the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Saroornagar Police Division, Cyberabad. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Saroornagar Division, re-examined the complainant and the victim woman, rerecorded their statements, collected evidence from other witnesses and after completing the investigation filed charge-sheet against the accused for the offence under Section 3(1) (xii) of the Act and Section 417 IPC.

4. The case was taken on file by the VII Metropolitan Magistrate, Hayathnagar and as the offence under Section 3(1) (xii) of the Act was exclusively triable by the Special Court, committed the case as PRC No. 15 of 2010 to the Special Court.

5. The Special Court for trial of SC/ST cases framed charges against the accused under Section 3(1)(xii) of the Act and under Section 417 IPC. As the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried the trial was conducted against the accused.

6. During the course of trial, the prosecution got examined PWs. 1 to 10 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.5. The accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. with regard to the incriminating material appearing against him in the evidence of prosecution witnesse