( 1 ) THIS Criminal revision case is filed by the revision petitioner, who is Accused No. 1 against the judgment of the learned I Additional metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, passed in Crl. No. 102 of 2002, dated 21-8-2001, whereunderthe learned Sessions judge dismissed the appeal in so far as revision petitioner/accused No. 1 is concerned, while confirming the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court against him and allowed the appeal in so far as Accused No. 2 is concerned, while acquitting him of the charge levelled against him. In so far as accused No. 3 is concerned, the lower appellate Court dismissed the appeal as abated. ( 2 ) THE brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of the present revision may be stated as under: ( 3 ) THE sub-inspector of Police, Chaderghat police Station, filed the charge sheet against a-1 to A-3 alleging that A-2 and A-3 are her in laws and the 1 st accused married the defacto complainant, P. W. 1 on 17-12-1993 for a dower of Rs. 50,000- and that jadhez articles including some gold and silver ornaments worth of rs. 2. 00 lakhs were presented at the time of marriage. Besides this, an amount of rs. 30,000- was paid as per the demand of the accused. Immediately afterthe marriage, the defacto complainant joined the company of the petitioner-accused and they lived happily for a few days and thereafter, A-1 and his parents started demanding Rs. 1,70,000/- for purchasing a flat. However, the parents of the defacto complainant could not arrange the said amount and they could only arrange an amount of Rs. 30. 000/ -. The accused then sold away 25 tolas of gold ornaments belonging to P. W. 1 for purchase of a flat. Thereafter, a-1 started harassing her and also used to beat and abuse her in filthy language. She could not bear the harassment and finally, she lodged a compliant with the police and on the basis of the same, the sub-lnspectorof Police registered a case in Crime No. 191/98 under sections 498-A and 406 of I. P. C. and under sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The Investigating Officer on completion of investigation, filed charge sheet against the accused. The accused were tried for the offences under Sections 498-A I. P. C. and under Sections 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition act. The Investigating Officer on completion of investigation, filed charge sheet against the accused. The accused were tried for the offences under Sections 498-A I. P. C. and under Sections 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition act. ( 4 ) IN order to prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined P. Ws. 1 to 3 and got marked Exs. P-1 to P-45. Besides this, M. Os. 1 and 2, case properties were marked. However, on behalf of the accused. D. W. 1 was examined and Exs. D-1 to D-8 were marked. On a perusal of the entire evidence, both oral and documentary, thetrial Court found the accused guilty of the offences under Sections 498-A and Sections 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act and accordingly convicted and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, in defaultto undergo simple irnprisonmentforone month for the offence under Section 498-A of i. P. C. They were further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each and to pay afine of Rs. 1,000/- each, in default to suffer S. I. for one month for the offence under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. and for the offence under Section 6 of the Dowry prohibition Act, they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonmentforsix months each and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for two months each. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. ( 5 ) AGGRIEVED by the same, the accused carried the matter in appeal by way of Criminal appeal No. 102 of 2001 before the I Additional metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. The learned Sessions Judge on re-appreciation of the evidence on record dismissed the appeal filed by the revision petitioner-A-1 confirming the conviction and sentence recorded against him by the trial Court and allowed the appeal in so far as A-2 is concerned, while acquitting him of the charges levelled against him. The lower appellate Court dismissed the appeal filed by Accused No. 3 as abated. Hence, the revision petitioner-Accused No. 1 preferred the present revision. ( 6 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner-accused would contend that the trial Court as well as the lower appellate Court erred in placing reliance upon the highly interested and discrepant testimony of P. Ws. 1 and 2 while convicting the accused. Hence, the revision petitioner-Accused No. 1 preferred the present revision. ( 6 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner-accused would contend that the trial Court as well as the lower appellate Court erred in placing reliance upon the highly interested and discrepant testimony of P. Ws. 1 and 2 while convicting the accused. There is no evidence on record to prove that the revision petitioner-accused had demanded additional dowry. He further contends that the defacto complainant stayed with the accused No. 1 hardly for 22 days and since A-1 left for jeddah thereafter, it is highly impossible for him to harass her within such a short span of period. Further, the defacto complainant could not examine one Mr. Latif before whom P. W. 2 is alleged to have paid the said sum of rs. 30,000/ -. He further contended that though m. O. 1 audio cassette was marked, the same was marked subject to his objection and the same is not proved. Therefore, the Courts below are not justified in convicting and sentencing the accused. ( 7 ) THE learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, contended that there is a concurrent finding of both the Courts below with regard to the involvement of the petitioner and, therefore, there is no need to interfere with the findings arrived at by the Courts below as they are based on sound reasoning. ( 8 ) HEARD the learned counsel and perused the entire material available on record. ( 9 ) THE scope of the revision is very limited, under which, it can be examined as to the correctness, legality or property of any finding, sentence or order and as to the regularity of any proceedings of the Court below. However, if there is perversity in the finding of the Court below, the evidence on record can be appreciated at this stage of the proceedings. ( 10 ) IN view of the contention that there is perversity in the findings of the Court below, let us now examine the veracity of the testimonies of the witnesses, so as to arrive at the conclusion as to whether the findings arrived at by the Courts below are in conformity with the evidence on record and that whether they suffer from any perversity. ( 11 ) P. W. 1 is no other than the wife of the accused. ( 11 ) P. W. 1 is no other than the wife of the accused. It is her evidence that her marriage with A-1 performed on 17-12-1993 fora dower of Rs. 50,000/- A-2 and A-3 are her in-laws. At the time of marriage negotiations, A-2 and a-3 demanded Rs. 30,000/- towards goda joda along with house hold articles including gold and silver articles. She further stated that she joined her husband immediately after marriage and they lived happily for some time and thereafter a-1 started demanding Rs. 1,70,000- as additional dowry for purchase of flat and when she expressed the inability of her parents, a-1 started harassing her at the instigation of a-2 and A-3. He also used to beat her and abuse her in filthy language. When she informed about this to her parents, they could arrange Rs. 30,000/- with great difficulty. However, A-1 was not satisfied with the said amount and used to beat her mercilessly on the ground that she has not complied with demand. Then A-1 sold all the gold ornaments and with that amount, he purchased a flat. He also refused to take her to Jedda on the ground that he is not eligible for family visa. However, when she had seen the passport and sponsorship form, she could notice that a-1 was working as a labourer at Jeddah and not as a computer programmer, contrary to what was stated in Ex. P-1. Finally, he left for saudi alone and thereafter, her in-laws started harassing herforthe additional dowry amount. When she was trying to inform A-1 about the harassment being caused to her by A-2 and a-3 over phone, she received an audiocassette from A-1 and in the said audio cassette A-1 said to have confessed about his illegal acts and told her to adjust herself. Then she dropped the idea of informing her husband about the harassment meted out to her at the hands of a-2 and A-3. Thereafter, A-2 and A-3 increased their harassment for additional dowry and when she informed about this to her parents, they expressed their inability to meet the demand. She was finally driven out from the house and they also warned her that unless she brings the additional dowry amount, she could not enter the house. Thereafter, A-2 and A-3 increased their harassment for additional dowry and when she informed about this to her parents, they expressed their inability to meet the demand. She was finally driven out from the house and they also warned her that unless she brings the additional dowry amount, she could not enter the house. She also came to know that the accused had contacted a prior marriage and suppressing the same, he married her for the second time. She also spoke about lodging of complaint with the police. ( 12 ) P. W. 2 is the father of P. W. 1. He corroborated the version of P. W. 1 in all material particulars. According to him, the marriage between A-1 and P. W. 1 was performed on 17-12-1993 and a day prior to their marriage, he gave Rs. 30,000/- to A-1 in the presence of a-2 and A-3. Besides this, he also gave jahez articles including 35 tulas of gold and 20 tolas of silver on the of marriage under Ex. P-6 to p-17 and P-32, 37 and 38 Which are the list of jahez articles and the said list was also signed by A-1 and A-2. He further stated that after their marriage, P. W. 1 joined the company of A-1 and they lived happily for a period of one and half months and thereafter, A-1 started demanding additional dowry of Rs. 1,70,000/-for purchasing a flat. When he expressed his inability to meet the said demand, A-1 started ill-treating her and used to beat her and torture her for the said amount. When his daughter complained about the attitude of A-1, he paid a sum of Rs. 30,000/ -. Thereafter. A-1 sold the gold ornaments, which were presented to p. W. 1 at the time of marriage. Finally A-2 and a-3 necked her out from the house. ( 13 ) HE further stated that when he verified the passport of A-1, he could realize that A-1 was working as a labourer at Saudi and not as a computer programmer and that A-1 has married one Sabia earlier. That apart, A-1 was not having family visa and he left for Saudi alone by leaving P. W. 1 in the care and custody of A-2 and A-3. That apart, A-1 was not having family visa and he left for Saudi alone by leaving P. W. 1 in the care and custody of A-2 and A-3. ( 14 ) P. W. 3 who is the mother of P. W. 1 corroborated the evidence of P. W. 1 in all material particulars. ( 15 ) ON the contrary, it is the evidence of a-1 who got himself examined as D. W. 1 that about five months prior to the date of his marriage with P. W. 1, he gave a paper publication in urdu daily under Ex. D-8 and in that he clearly mentioned that there is no demand for dowry. He did not take anything from the parents of P. W. 1 and 27 days after their marriage, he left for Jeddah. Subsequently, he came to know that P. W. 2 is not a businessman, but a teacher in primary school. According to him, P. W. s. 1 and 2 used to demand him to send money from Jeddah and he also paid sum of Rs. 20,000/- every month. To his surprise, P. W. 1 changed her behaviour towards him and his parents while she was prosecuting M. A. course. She never used to inform his parents as to where she was going when she was leaving the house. Further, P. W. 1 never complained to him that his parents are harassing her while he was in jeddah. He further stated that he never sent any audio cassette to P. W. 1 under M. O. 1. He also denied that the voice in M. O. 1, was his voice. However, when he visited India in september, 1994 to take her along with him, she refused to join him and thereafter he alone leftfor Jeddah leaving P. W. 1 with his parents. P. W. 1 finally went back to her paternal home. He also could not contact her over phone. Finally, he decided to divorce her and sent a valid divorce from Jeddah, which was also attested by Indian Embassy at Jeddah and the same was also published inthe newspaper under Ex. D-7 in the month of August, 1995, having come to know of this, P. W. 1 lodged the compliant under Ex. P-1 against him and his parents. Finally, he decided to divorce her and sent a valid divorce from Jeddah, which was also attested by Indian Embassy at Jeddah and the same was also published inthe newspaper under Ex. D-7 in the month of August, 1995, having come to know of this, P. W. 1 lodged the compliant under Ex. P-1 against him and his parents. ( 16 ) BEFORE going into the merits of the matter, it is pertinent to note that there is no dispute as to the relationship of both the defacto complainant and the accused. Here it is very curious to note that after the marriage the defacto complainant and the first accused led martial life for a period of some days. In the meantime, the accused had been to Jeddan on his avocation as an employee. In this regard, except making omnibus allegations to the effect that at the time of marriage the accused were given rupees fifty thousand and subsequently after the marriage, A-1 used to demand additional dowry for the purpose of purchasing a flat and the accused used to harass the de facto complainant, the investigating agency has not taken any pains to examine any neighbours of the vicinity or my. Lateef from whom P. W. 2 is alleged to have borrowed the amount of Rs. 30,000/- for the purpose of giving the same to the accused towards additional dowry. ( 17 ) IN this back ground of the matter, the non-examination of any neighbours in the vicinity as well as Mr. Lateef is fatal to the case of the prosecution. ( 18 ) EXCEPT the oral testimony of P. Ws. 1 and 2 and the exhibition of video cassette, no other material is placed on record to corroborate the case of the prosecution. ( 19 ) AT this stage, it is also relevant to note that M. O. 1 Audio Casette has been marked during the course of evidence of P. W. 1 subject to objection. According to P. W. 1, M. O. 1 audio cassette has been sent by the accused through a messenger. But, as a matter of fact, it is not known as to when the alleged M. 0. 1 was sent by the accused or whether the same was sent during the interrignum period of Exs. D-3 to D-5, and D-21, fax Message dated 18-6-1995 or even prior to it or subsequent to them. But, as a matter of fact, it is not known as to when the alleged M. 0. 1 was sent by the accused or whether the same was sent during the interrignum period of Exs. D-3 to D-5, and D-21, fax Message dated 18-6-1995 or even prior to it or subsequent to them. The evidence is not clear in its terms in this regard. Apart from that the alleged messenger through whom M. O. 1 was alleged to have been sent was not examined. The non-explanation as to the period during which the alleged audio cassette was sent as well as non-examination of the messenger, is fatal to the case of the prosecution. Even assuming that M. O. 1 was sent by the accused to P. W. 1, the same shall be subjected to the following tests as enunciated by the Apex Court in the judgment reported in Z. B. Bukhari v. V. R. Mehra and others so as to take into consideration the contents of M. O. 1 as that of evidence on behalf of the prosecution. " (a)The voice of the person alleged to be speaking must be duly identified by the maker of the record or by others who know it. (b) Accuracy of what was actually recorded had to be proved by the maker of the record and satisfactory evidence, direct or circumstantial, had to be there so as to rule out possibilities of tampering with the record. (c) The subject-matter recorded had to be shown to be relevant according to rules of relevancy found in the Evidence act. " ( 20 ) BEFORE going to deal with the aspects as to whether M. O. 1 stands to the tests as laid down by the Apex Court the judgment cited supra, first of all, it has to be examined as to the circumstances and the dire necessity under which the same has been sent by the accused. ( 21 ) A perusal of Exs. ( 21 ) A perusal of Exs. D-3 to D-5 and the fax message dated 18-6-1995 which was sent just one month prior to the filing of the compliant by P. W. 1, creeps a doubt in the mind of the court as to the existence of M. O. 1 irrespective of the fact as to whether the M. O. 1 contents of are true or not and whether the voice therein is that of the accused, the non-explanation as to the period or the date on which it was sent coupled with the non-examination of the messenger who is alleged to have brought the same, leads to draw on adverse inference against the case of the prosecution. However, no efforts have been made by the prosecution so as to prove the contents of M. O. 1 by subjecting it to the tests laid down by the Apex court in the aforementioned judgment. Therefore, I feel that it is much difficult to place reliance on M. O. 1. ( 22 ) AT this juncture, it is very curious to note that while the 1st accused was working at jeddah, he sent Rs. 20,000/- per month to p. W. 1 and the same was also acknowledged by her. A perusal of Exs. D-3 to D-5, letters written by P. W. 1 to the accused and even ex. D-21, a copy of fax message sent by p. W. 1 to the accused makes it clear that there was a cordial and affectionate relationship between the accused and P. W. 1 even one month prior to the filing of the present complaint, but, it is much difficult to understand as to what transpired during this short span of one month and the non explanation of the same coupled with Exs. D-3 to D-5 and D-21 falsifies the case of the prosecution that the accused used to harass the defacto complainant for additional dowry. But, both the Courts below have quite mechanically based its (their) findings on the oral testimonies of P. Ws. 1 and 2 without any corroborative and independent evidence and they have also failed to consider the above aspects in a proper perspective. But, both the Courts below have arrived at the conclusions on mere surmises and conjunctures under the shadow of relationship of wife and husband. 1 and 2 without any corroborative and independent evidence and they have also failed to consider the above aspects in a proper perspective. But, both the Courts below have arrived at the conclusions on mere surmises and conjunctures under the shadow of relationship of wife and husband. ( 23 ) NOW, with regard to Jahez articles which were alleged to have been presented to the accused at the time of marriage, it can be presumed that usually at the time of the marriage the parents of the bride groom desirous to have presented those articles for setting up a separate home out of love and affection. Therefore, the presentation of those articles cannot be construed as an adverse inference against the accused. However, if at all, those articles were given to the accused and if those articles have not yet been returned by the accused, it is needless to observe that the defacto complainant is always at liberty to set the law into motion for return of those articles in an appropriate proceedings. ( 24 ) AS already stated, except the interested testimonies of P. Ws. 1 and 2, there is not even an iota of evidence to connect the accused with any of the offences. Apart from that, the short span of marital life of the defacto complainant and the accused and the leaving of the accused to Jeddah on his avocation as an employee subsequently a few days after the marriage and sending of the amount of Rs. 20,000/-per month, which were acknowledged by p. W. 1 will ultimately falsify the case of the prosecution as alleged against the accused. ( 25 ) WITH regard to the question as to whether the accused deceived the defacto complainant by introducing himself that he is a computeroperator and whether he is originally working as a labou rer, it is needless to observe that those questions cannot be adjudicated in a case of this nature in the absence of any material evidence except the oral assertions. ( 26 ) IN the present facts and circumstances of the case and for the reasons stated in the foregoing paragraphs, I have no hesitation to hold that the findings of both the Courts below in the absence of any iota of evidence in so far as this petitioner is concerned, are nothing but perverse and consequently they are liable to be set aside. Therefore, the conviction and sentence recorded against the petitioner-accused for the offences alleged against him would warrant interference by this Court and as such the same are liable to be set aside. ( 27 ) IN the result, the revision is allowed and the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court as confirmed by the lower appellate court against the revision petitioner-Accused no. 1 in Crl. Appeal; No. 102 of 2001, dated 21-8-2002 for the offences under Sections 498-A and under Sections 4 and 6 of Dowry prohibition Act, are hereby set aside and the revision petitioner-A-1 is acquitted of the said charges. The fine amount, if any paid by the revision petitioner-A-1 shall be refunded to him. .