Telangana High Court
Allam Swamy, vs The State Of Ap Rep By Its Pp Hyd., on 1 December, 2022
Bench: K.Surender
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.470 OF 2008
ORDER :
This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the
petitioner-accused No.1 against the judgement dated 12.03.2008
in Crl.A.No.22 of 2007 on the file of III Additional District and
Sessions Judge(Fast Tract Court) at Medak, confirming the
judgment of conviction and sentence dated 19.04.2007 in
S.C.No.200 of 2005 on the file of Assistant Sessions Judge,
Medak, for the offence under Section Section 304-B of I.P.C.
2. Heard. Perused the record.
3. Briefly, the facts of the case are, that the marriage of the
petitioner and the deceased took place three years prior to the
date of incident i.e., on 24.04.2004. At the time of the marriage
an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was agreed to be given to the
petitioner-accused No.1 towards dowry. However, an amount of
Rs.50,000/- was given at the time of marriage. Later on,
petitioner-accused No.1 along with accused Nos.2 to 5, who are
close relatives, started harassing the deceased physically and
mentally for payment of balance amount of Rs.50,000/-. Later,
the said balance amount of Rs.50,000/- was paid to the
2 KS,J
Crl.rc.No.470 of 2008
petitioner-accused No.1 in the presence of elders i.e, Sri Sapna
Anjaiah and Sri Mandal Laxmaiah. The main allegation against the
petitioner is that not being satisfied with the said amount, the
petitioner along with the deceased went to PW.1, who is the
father of the deceased and demanded to pay an amount of
Rs.20,000/- as additional dowry. PW-1 expressed his inability to
pay the said amount, however, he assured to fulfill his demand
by selling bulls in a short period of time. While so, on 23.04.2004
at about 6 p.m., PW-1 received a phone call that his daughter
committed suicide by hanging herself in her in-laws house.
4. In the evidence of the witnesses examined, though there is
consistency regarding the payment of dowry of Rs.50,000/- being
given at the time of marriage and also payment of balance
amount of dowry Rs.50,000/-, there is no evidence with regard to
the harassment as far as the demand for additional dowry of
Rs.20,000/- which was made three days prior to the incident.
None of the witnesses stated that the deceased was subjected to
any kind of harassment for the non-fulfillment of the demand of
additional dowry of Rs.20,000/-. Further, though PW-1 and 2,
stated that the petitioner came to their house and made a
demand for additional dowry of Rs.20,000/-. There is no
3 KS,J
Crl.rc.No.470 of 2008
allegation of any harassment to fulfill this demand. Except stating
about demanding of additional dowry, there is no element of
coercion or any pressure or any kind of physical or verbal abuse
with regard to demand of additional dowry. Mere demand of
additional dowry would not fall within the definition of cruelty
unless harassed in any manner to meet the demand. Therefore,
the period of imprisonment already undergone by the petitioner-
accused No.1 is sufficient and reasonable.
5. Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to set aside the
conviction imposed vide judgement dated 19.04.2007 in
S.C.No.200 of 2005 on the file of Assistant Sessions Judge,
Medak, as confirmed vide judgement dated 12.03.2008 in
Crl.A.No.22 of 2007 on the file of III Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Medak. It is informed by the learned counsel that
the petitioner has undergone 3½ years of imprisonment
6. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any,
shall stand closed.
_______________
K.SURENDER, J
01.12.2022
gms
4 KS,J
Crl.rc.No.470 of 2008
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.470 OF 2008
01.12.2022
gms
