COMMON JUDGMENT

The Criminal Appeal No.318 of 2019 is filed by the appellants, who are the accused in S.C.No.21 of 2016. The appellant in Crl.A.No.604 of 2019 is the de-facto complainant.

2.For the sake of convenience, the ranking of the parties are mentioned as arrayed in the Sessions case.

3.The respondent/police originally registered the case under Section

174(3) of Cr.P.C., in Crime No.1592 of 2014, against the accused A1, A2, A3. After inquest and investigation, the offences were altered into 498(A), 304(B) of IPC., or in alternative of Section 306 of IPC. After investigation, the investigation officer laid a charge sheet before the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Chennai. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate, taken the charge sheet on file in PRC.No.109 of 2015. After completing the formalities, since the offence is exclusively triable by the Court of Session, it has committed the case to the learned Principal Session Judge. The learned Principal Session Judge has taken the case on file in S.C.No.71 of 2016 and made it over to the Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Chennai, for disposal of the case. The learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, on receipt of the records and after completing the formalities, framed the first charge against A1 & A3 for the offence under Section 498(A) of IPC., and the second charge against the accused A1, and A3, for the offence under Section 306 of IPC. After framing charges and completing the formalities, the Trial Court altered the second charge of Section

304(B) of IPC., or in alternate Section 306 of IPC.

4.In order to prove the case of the prosecution, on the side of the prosecution, during trial, 10 witnesses were examined as PW.1 to PW.10 and 17 documents were marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P17, besides one material object was marked as MO.1. After completing the examination of prosecution witnesses, incriminating circumstances were culled out from the evidence of the prosecution witnesses were put before the accused, they denied the same as false and pleaded not guilty. On the side of the defence one witness was examined as DW.1 and two documents were marked as Ex.D1 & D2.

5.On completion of trial and conclusion of the arguments advanced on either side, considering the oral and documentary evidence and other materials placed before the Trial Court, the Trial Court not found the accused guilty for the offence under Section 304(B) and 306 of IPC., and found A1 to A3 guilty of the offence under Section 498(A) of IPC., and sentenced them to undergo two years simple imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- each, in default, to undergo further period of six months simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 498(A) of IPC., and acquitted them for the offence under Section 304(B) or in alternate under Section 306 of IPC., During the pendency of trial, the accused/A2 died and the charge against him got abated.

6.Now challenging the said Judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court against A1 to A3, they have filed Criminal Appeal No.318 of 2019. Challenging the acquittal of the accused for the offence under Section 304(B) or alternatively 306 of IPC., and also lesser punishment of sentence of imprisonment imposed against the appellants/accused A1 & A3 for the offence under Section 498(A), the de-facto complainant has filed the Criminal Appeal No.604 of 2019, before this Court.

7.Since both the appeals are arising out of the same Judgment, both appeals are heard together and decided by this Common Judgment.

8.The learned counsel for the accused/appellant in Crl.A.No.318 of 2019 would submit that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Though the Trial Court rightly appreciated the evidence and acquitted the accused for offence under Section 304(B) or alternatively 306 of IPC, the Trial Court erroneously found that the accused committed the offence under Section 498(A) of IPC., Further, he would submit that there is no direct evidence to show that the accused deman