In a shocking turn of events, a case that sent ripples across the state unfolded as a court sentenced a woman and her family members to one year in jail and a fine of Rs.5,000 for concealing crucial information about her past marriage. The verdict came after a meticulous investigation and trial that exposed a web of deception and misinformation.
The plaintiff, Edla Srinivasa Rao of Siripuram area in Visakhapatnam, approached the Bharat Matrimony platform in pursuit of a life partner. According to him, matrimony representatives conveyed that Ramadevi, a teacher from Peddapuram in the East Godavari district, had previously been married. Despite this revelation, Srinivasa Rao and Ramadevi tied the knot on December 22, 2012, with the consent of both families.
However, the harmony in their relationship did not last long. After a period of mutual exclusivity, Ramadevi returned to her birthplace, and attempts to bring her back were futile. Srinivasa Rao took the matter to the family court in Visakhapatnam, seeking resolution. Following court suggestions, the couple reconciled briefly, only to part ways again due to irreconcilable differences.
The plot thickened when Ramadevi’s family, discontent with the separation, filed complaints against Srinivasa Rao. Undeterred, Srinivasa Rao delved into Ramadevi’s past and discovered that she had been previously married to Sunil on June 21, 2003, a fact that had been concealed from him. Sunil and Ramadevi’s marriage had been legally dissolved due to differences.
Armed with this newfound information, Srinivasa Rao filed a complaint at the Third Town Police Station, sparking an investigation. The police, after scrutinizing the evidence, filed charge sheets against Ramadevi and her family members, including Krishnamurthy, Prabhavathi, Narendra, and Professor Sunita.
The case, presided over by Judge T.V. Rajesh, concluded with a damning verdict. The judge sentenced Ramadevi and her family members to one year in jail and imposed a fine of Rs.5,000. Additionally, if the fine is not paid, the sentence requires serving an additional month with simple imprisonment.
Commenting on the rarity of such cases, legal experts noted the significance of transparency in marital disclosures and the potential legal consequences of concealing pertinent information. The verdict serves as a stern warning against withholding crucial details that can impact the foundation of marital relationships.
This sensational case underscores the importance of thorough investigations in the realm of matrimonial alliances, shedding light on the consequences of deceit in the sacred institution of marriage.