IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS THURSDAY, THE 23^RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA, 1945 CRL.REV.PET NO. 2756 OF 2011 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CRA 651/2004 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-III, THALASSERY CC 146/2003 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,THALASSERY REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:

ABDUL KHADER @ BALAN KURUP, S/O.RAMA KURUP, AGED 57 YEARS, KELAKAM AMSOM, DESOM, THALASSERY TALUK.

BY ADV SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KOLAVALLUR POLICE STATION, KANNUR, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

Addl.2. RAHIYANATH, D/O.HASSAN, AGED 35 YEARS, PARAPPAN HOUSE, EDAKKARA AMSOM, DESOM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

(Addl.R2 is impleaded as per order dated 6.12.2011 in Crl.M.A 10419/2011)

BY SR.P.P.SMT.PUSHPALATHA M.K.

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.11.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The revision petition is filed challenging the legality and correctness of the judgment passed in Crl.A No.651/2004 of the Court of Session, Thalassery (Appellate Court), confirming the judgment in C.C No.146/2003 of the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thalassery (Trial Court) holding the revision petitioner guilty and convicting him and sentencing him for the offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code ( 'IPC' for short). The revision petitioner was the sole accused in the above crime.

The prosecution on brief

2. The prosecution case is that, the revision petitioner was married to PW1/CW1 on 5.1.2003 as per Muslim religious rites and customs. They were living together as husband and wife in a rented house at Parat in Kolavallur Amsom from 23.2.2003 to 6.4.2003. PW1 was given 15 sovereigns of gold ornaments and Rs.50,000/- as share in her parental properties. After the couple began cohabitation, the accused started demanding more dowry from PW1. On 10.3.2003, he tactfully took away eight sovereigns of gold ornaments and disposed it of under the guise of starting a business, and spent the entire amount. Again on 6.4.2003, he demanded for the remaining 7 sovereigns of gold ornaments of PW1. When she refused to yield to the demand of the accused, he brutally manhandled her and left the place. Thus, the accused has committed the above offence.

3. PW1 lodged a complaint with the Kolavallur Police on 9.4.2003 and Ext.P4 F.I.R was registered in Crime No.134/2003.

4. The Police, after investigation, filed the final report before the Trial Court alleging that the accused has committed the offence under Sec.498A of the IPC. The accused denied the substance of accusations read over to him.

5. In the trial, the prosecution examined PW1 to PW6 and marked Exts.P1 to P6 in evidence. The accused denied the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the questioning under Sec.313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The accused examined DW1 and marked Ext.D1 on his side.

6. The Trial Court, after analysing the materials placed on record, found the accused guilty and convicted him for the offence under Section 498A of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of two months.

7. Aggrieved by the judgment, the accused preferred Crl.A No.651/2004 before the Appellate Court.

8. The Appellate Court, after re-appreciating the materials placed on record, by the impugned judgment, confirmed the conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court.

9. It is challenging the concurrent judgments of the courts below; the accused has preferred this revision petition.

10. Heard; Sri.C.P.Peethambaran, the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and Smt.Pushpalatha M.K, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent – State.

11. Is there any illegality, irregularity or impropriety in