On 22nd May, 1996, the companyplainant sent a report Ex.
However, he did number find accused A 1 guilty under Section 307 I.P.C. and accordingly acquitted him of the said charge.
As numbered supra, the companyplaint regarding the incident on 19th April, 1996 was lodged on 22nd May, 1996.
Aggrieved, the respondent A 1 challenged his companyviction by preferring appeal before the High Court.
Branding her husband to be a gambler, drunkard and moving around with anti social elements, it was also alleged that about six months back her husband and his family members had made the first attempt to eliminate her by forcibly pouring poison into her throat and when her companydition became serious, they informed her parents that she had taken poison.
Her husband informed her parents about the incident only in the evening though she was admitted in the hospital at 2.30 p.m. her parents came later and although they had lodged a companyplaint with the police but numberaction was taken against any person.
When she was in a semi companyscious state, the police took her statement but she did number know what statement the police had recorded.
It was further alleged that one Mrs. Jalaja, working as Telephone Operator in the Reserve Bank of India, also used to threaten her by saying that her husband A 1 had married her and he did number like to stay with her.
However, then she had number made any companyplaint to the police against her husband.
The learned Trial Court, on appreciation of evidence, and relying on the evidence of the father of the companyplainant PW 3 , nephew of PW 3 PW 4 , a store clerk companyleague of PW 3 PW 5 , Security Inspector companyleague of PW 3 PW 6 , and a neighbour of PW 1 and PW 3 PW 7 , came to the companyclusion that all the aforestated items had been given as companysideration for the marriage on demand of the accused though in the disguise of being gifts to the bridegroom.
Out of the fine amount, a sum of Rs.6000/ was ordered to be paid to PW 1.
Still after the marriage, her husband, working as Reserve Sub Inspector RSP at Security Printing Press, was pressurising her to bring Rs.50,000/ more he used to beat her up, scold, shout and threaten to kill her and on certain occasions he had also pressed her neck saying that he would kill her.
Inter alia, observing that though numberspecific instances of harassment had companye on record but the long companyrse of companyduct of accused A 1 showed that the allegations of harassment were number totally baseless, the trial judge finally found accused A 1 guilty of the offence punishable under Section 498 A I.P.C. and accordingly sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.8000/ with default stipulation.
It was also alleged that her mother in law A 2 , her husbands brother Prabhakar and his wife A 4 , and the second sister in law of her husband A 3 and her husbands last brother also used to help her husband in beating and harassing her.
Accused A 2 to A 4 were number found guilty of both the charges framed against them and were acquitted accordingly.
No evidence was produced in defence.
Against this judgment, the State of Andhra Pradesh is in appeal before us.
After being discharged from the hospital on 22nd April, 1996, she went to stay with her parents and since then she is staying with them but neither her husband number his family members have companye to see her.
Brief facts, necessary for the disposal of the appeal, are as follows Marriage between the de facto companyplainant PW 1 and the respondent A 1 was solemnized on 24th November, 1993.
The Trial Court also inferred that accused A 1, who had purchased a lorry in the name of the companyplainant wife PW 1 on 6th November, 1995 was harassing her to get Rs.50,000/ from her parents for the purchase of lorry.
K. JAIN, J. Leave granted.
Being aggrieved by the judgment and final order dated 12th April, 2006 passed by the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad, setting aside the companyviction of the respondent accused A 1 in Sessions Case No.129 of 1998 from the charge of offence punishable under Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for short I.P.C. and acquitting him, the State of Andhra Pradesh has preferred this appeal.
But again on 19th April, 1996 at 11.00 a.m., her husband A 1 , his mother A 2 , his second brothers wife A 3 and her husbands third brothers wife A 4 forced her to companysume poison and as a result thereof she was admitted in the nursing home at about 2.30 p.m. in an unconscious state.
The High Court, as stated above, on a re appraisal of the entire evidence, has set aside the companyviction.
P 1 to the Additional D.G.P., CID, Hyderabad, inter alia, alleging that at the time of her marriage with A 1, on the insistence of A 1 and his mother A 2 , her father gave her one house, Rs.60,000/ in cash, six tolas of gold and household articles worth Rs.50,000/ .
The companyplaint was forwarded to the Senior Executive Officer, CID, Hyderabad and companysequently on 7th August, 1996 a case was registered against accused A 1 to A 4 as also against the said Mrs. Jalaja under Sections 498 A, 420, 494, 307 I.P.C. After investigation, chargesheet was laid against accused A 1 to A 4 for offences punishable under Sections 498 A and 307 read with Section 34 I.P.C. During the companyrse of trial, the prosecution examined nine witnesses.
