HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER CRIMINAL APPEAL No.218 OF 2016

JUDGMENT:

1. The appellant/accused was convicted for the offences under Sections 417, 420 IPC and Section 3(1)(xii) of SCs & STs (POA) Act, 1989 vide judgment in Special S.C.No.77 of 2011, dated 29.02.2016 passed by the Special Sessions Judge for trial of offences under SCs & STs (POA) Act, Karimnagar.

2. According to victim/P.W.2, the appellant was working as constable in police department. He followed her and expressed his willingness to marry her. Thereafter, they had physical intimacy over a period of time. In her deposition, P.W.2 narrated several instances of going together and also going to different places and having sexual intercourse. Since appellant refused to marry, she complained to the elders of their caste. She also consumed vasmol hair dye and attempted to commit suicide. She was taken to the hospital and treated. Believing the version of marriage, she in fact surrendered herself to the appellant. The complaint was filed on 18.03.2011. Charge sheet was filed on 12.08.2011. While the case was pending in the year 2013, the appellant married P.W.2 and the marriage was registered with the Sub-Registrar, Boinpally. In the month of December, 2013, the marriage had taken place in Yadagirigutta temple and the marriage was registered in the month of May, 2014. On the date of registration also, she was beaten up and thereafter, she went to the house of her parents and started living with her parents at Secunderabad. Even prior to marriage, P.W.2 gave birth to one female child in the month of January, 2013. 3. The only ground raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that since appellant already married P.W.2, the question of cheating does not arise. At most, the offence of harassing her after marriage may be an offence under Section 498-

A IPC or allied offences but not under Section 420 IPC.

4. There is considerable force in the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant. The complaint was given in the year 2011 for cheating P.W.2. The reason for cheating is that having physical intimacy with her, he did not marry her. However, later the marriage had taken place in the month of December, 2013 and prior to that also, child was born in the month of January, 2013.

One year after the birth of the child, marriage had taken place. Six months after the marriage, the marriage was registered.

5. In view of the marriage in between them, even prior to the deposition of P.W.2, the question of cheating does not arise. Further, under Section 3(1)(xii) of SCs & STs (POA) Act, a person should have dominated the will of the woman and should have forced her to have sexual intercourse. The narration given by P.W.2 in her chief examination would go to show that she was a major and consented to go along with the appellant. They have been to several places over a period of time. In the said circumstances, the question of the appellant being in a position to dominate P.W.2’s will and being in such position, having sexual intercourse, is not probable.

6. In the said circumstances, none of the ingredients of either under Section 417 or Section 3(1)(xii) of SCs & STs (POA) Act, are made out.

7. In the result, judgment of trial Court in Special S.C.No.77 of 2011 dated 29.02.2016 is hereby set aside and the appellant is acquitted.

8. Criminal Appeal is allowed. Since the appellant is on bail, his bail bonds shall stand discharged.

__________________

K.SURENDER, J Date: 08.11.2024 kvs