Exclusive HOLI Discounts!
Get Courses and Combos at Upto 50% OFF!
Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

rajendra (na)     22 May 2014

Will this judgement suits for defamation(civil/criminal)?

J U D G M E N T

The Inspector of Police, women U/G P.S., Kadapa filed a charge sheet 

against the accused. 

As the per the averments of the charge sheet the marriage of L.W.5 

was perform with A.1 on 25.8.2011 and at the time of marriage L.W.1 gave 

five tolas of gold to the accused as dowry. They lived happily for some 

time. A.1 started to harass L.W.5 both physically and mentally and A.2 to 

A.5 supported A.1. All the accused demanded L.W.5 for additional dowry 

and also threatened with dire consequences, if she failed to oblize their 

demand and the same was informed to L.W.1 and while talking to L.W.1 

the conversation was hear by A.1, he grew wild and dragged the cell phone 

from her and necked away L.W.5 from his house, this caused mentaly 

agony. Hence on 11.7.2012 L.W.1 preferred a complaint as L.W.5 was mentally depressed and unable to speak. Basing on the complaint of

L.W.5, the L.W.9 registered a case in Crime No.58/2012 against the

accused and also examined L.Ws.1 to 4 and recorded their statements. 

L.W.10 verified the investigation done by L.W.9 and found it in correct line. 

During the course of investigation L.W.10 arrested A.1 on 18.7.2012. A.3 

to A.6 as per FIR obtained anticipatory bail and as per the deposition of 

L.Ws.6 to 8 there is no participation of A.2 as per FIR, as no primafacie 

case is made out, his name was deleted by L.W.10 after obtaining 

permission from S.D.P.O., Kadapa. After completion of investigation, he 

laid the charge sheet. 

2. On appearance of the accused, copies were furnished as 

mandates under sec.207 Cr.P.C.

3. The accused were examined under sec.239 Cr.P.C. and charges 

were framed, read over and explained to them, for which they denied and 

claimed to be tried. 

4. As there is no incriminating evidence against the accused, 

sec.313 Cr.P.C. is dispensed. 

5. Basing on the above facts the point for determination is that:- 

whether the prosecution has proved the offences charged under 

sec.498-A, 506 IPC, and sec.3 and 4 of D.P. Act., beyond all reasonable 

doubt?

6. On behalf of the prosecution P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and 

Exs.P.1 and 2 were marked. 

7. It is the case of prosecution that as P.W.1 suffered mental 

agony due to the physical and mental harassment of A.1 for an additional 

dowry, she was depressed and forced to remain at the house of L.W.1. 

The accused necked her out as she failed to oblize his demand of 

additional dowry, as such L.W.1 lodged a report in the police station. 

However, the victim i.e., P.W.1 came before the Court and stated that the 

allegations made in Ex.P.1 i.e., complaint was not true and correct and she is residing with the accused happily and the contents of alleged in Ex.P.1

are not true and correct, and to support her contention P.W.2 the

neighbour of the accused house was also examined, he also deposded 

against the prosecution and in favour of P.W.1. In the circumstances, as 

there is no incriminating evidence against the accused they cannot be 

convicted. 

8. In the result, the accused Nos.1, 3 to 6 are found not guilty for the 

offences under Sec.498-A, 506 IPC., and sec.3 and 4 of D.P. Act, and are 

acquitted under sec.248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bonds of accused shall stands 

cancelled. The accused shall furnish a bond under sec.437(a) Cr.P.C. that 

he shall appear before the Appellate Court in the event of he receives 

summons within six months from today. 

Dictated to the Personal-Asst., transcribed by him, corrected and 

pronounced by me in open court on this the 13

th

 day of June, 2013.

 

 

 I ADDL.JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF I CLASS,

 K A D A P A.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR

FOR PROSECUTION FOR DEFENCE

PW.1: Nerugattu Jaya N I L 

P.W.2: Lingala Pedda Narasimhulu 

 EXHIBITS MARKED FOR PROSECUTION. 

Ex.P.1: Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.1 

Ex.P.2: Sec.161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.w.2 

 

Is this Judgement attract defamation(civil or criminal)?



Learning

 1 Replies

Sudhir Kumar, Advocate (Advocate)     24 May 2014

you are only showing judgement which indicates that there is reconciliattion and wife has deposed in favour  of husband family. 

 

please come with full facts.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register