Telangana High Court
Shaik Mabuvali And 3 Others vs The State Of A.P. Rep., By Its Pp on 8 January, 2025
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.125 OF 2012
JUDGMENT:
The appellants are A1 to A4 who were convicted under
Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code. The appellants were charge
sheeted by the Police for the offences under sections 314, 304-B
and 498-A of IPC. However, A1 to A4 were found not guilty for the
offences under Sections 314 and 304-B of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the marriage of Khader
Bee (deceased) was performed with A1 (1st appellant) five years
prior to her death. At the time of marriage, dowry of Rs.32,000/-
cash and 1 ½ Tulas gold and other household articles were given.
The deceased gave birth to a girl child and thereafter to a son. All
the appellants were continuously harassing the deceased for
additional dowry since one year prior to her death on 22.04.2010.
The deceased was carrying four months pregnancy and the
accused insisted the deceased to get aborted, however, when she
resisted, she was made to consume tablets to cause abortion. On
the same day she was beaten up and due to her condition she was
taken to Government Hospital where she died at about 6.30 p.m.
on 22.04.2010. On the same day, complaint was filed which was
registered under Sections 314, 304-B and 498-A r/w.34 of IPC.
After concluding investigation, charge sheet was filed for the said
offences. The learned Sessions Judge examined PWs.1 to 17 and
Exs.P1 to P5 were also marked during trial.
3. The learned Sessions Judge found that no offence was made
out under Sections 314, 304-B of IPC, however, sentenced the
appellants under Section 498-A of IPC.
4. The State has not preferred any appeal against the acquittal
of the accused for the offences under Sections 314 and 304-B of
IPC.
5. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellants would submit
that the main grievance of the prosecution witnesses is that the
deceased was beaten up and was forced to consume tablets for
causing abortion. However, the said allegations were found to be
false. Except for the said allegation of beating and taking her to the
hospital, there is nothing on record to infer that the appellants
have in any manner subjected the deceased to cruelty.
6. On the other hand learned Public Prosecutor stated that the
father of the deceased-PW.1, brother-PW.2, mother-PW.3, sister-
PW.4, have all stated regarding the dowry being given at the time of
marriage and thereafter the accused harassing them for dowry.
7. Having gone through the record the allegation against the
appellants is that the deceased was harassed on the ground that
she brought less dowry. The deceased frequently complained about
being beaten and the appellants scolding her.
8. The constant beating and scolding would amount to cruelty.
It is not disputed that the deceased was living along with the
appellants. Though no specific instances were narrated, however,
according to the witnesses, the beating and scolding was a regular
feature.
9. In the said circumstances, the conviction under Section 498-
A of IPC is sustained. However, keeping in view that the incident is
of the year 2010 and 15 years have passed by, the sentence of
imprisonment is reduced to the period already undergone by them.
10. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal is partly allowed.
___________________
K.SURENDER, J
Date: 08.01.2025
tk
