V. BHASKARA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal filed by the sole accused against his conviction under Section 304-B I. P. C. and sentence to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years.

( 2 ) THE facts in brief as spoken to by the P. Ws. are : The accused-appellant is the husband of the deceased Prabhavathi. P. W. 1 is the father of the deceased. The marriage took place on 22-5-1983. P. W. 1 paid a total amount of Rs. 60,000/- towards dowry to the accused and his father. However, the accused was harassing the deceased to get an additional dowry of Rs. 40,000/- from her parents. P. W. 4, who is the maternal-uncle of the wife of P. W. 1 and also of the mother of the accused, admonished the accused for demanding additional dowry. From 1985 to 87 the deceased did not join the society of the accused as the accused went to Gudur for further studies. Even during that period, the accused used to harass the deceased for additional dowry as and when he was visiting the house of P. W. 1. The deceased was also informing about this harassment to her father. In June, 87 the accused completed his studies and from then onwards he used to visit the house of the deceased and her parents once in a week and continued to harass the deceased for the additional dowry. Four days prior to 17-8-1987 the date of incident the accused returned from Gudur and went to his native place Vepakuntla and on coming to know of this the deceased also left for Vepakuntla to join her husband. On 17-8-1987 the accused returned to the house of P. W. 1 along with the deceased from Vepakuntla and seriously demanded P. W. 1 to pay the additional dowry by threatening to desert the deceased. After that demand at about 2-00 p. m. on 17-8-87 the accused and the deceased left for Vepakuntla. About half an hour or one hour later the accused returned to the house of P. W. 1 and inquired whether the deceased came back to the house since she disappeared and not seen. On this P. W. 1 and his relatives searched for the deceased and found her dead-body in the KONERU (reservoir with steps) of Shri Narasirnhaswamy temple. P. W. 1 reported the matter to P. W. 7 the S. I. , of Police at about 5-00 p. m. on the same day. The crime was registered under Section 304-B IPC. Later P. W. 7 conducted panchanama in the presence of P. W. 6 and got the dead-body removed with the help of P. W. 2, a rickshaw-puller. On the following day (18-7-87) P. W. 9 conducted the inquest and Ex. P-13 is the inquest report. Later on P. W. 10 took up the investigation, recorded the statements of the witnesses and sent the dead-body for post-mortem. The Doctor, P. W. 5; conducted the post-mortem and issued the certificate, Ex. P-8. He opined that the death was due to asphyxia due to drowning. After completion of the investigation P. W. 10 filed the charge-sheet.

( 3 ) THE prosecution in all examined P. Ws. 1 to 10 and marked Exs. P-1 to P-14. The defence marked Exs. D-1 to D-18. When examined the accused denied the allegation of demand for additional dowry and harassment. On the other hand, he pleaded that the deceased and himself were amicable and living with love. The trial Court after considering the entire material on record convicted and sentenced the accused as stated supra. Hence this appeal.

( 4 ) MR. Padmanabha Reddy, the learned counsel for the appellant, firstly contended that there is no evidence to prove that there was a valid marriage between the accused and the deceased so as to bring in the legal relationship of husband wife for purposes of attracting either S. 304b or 498a, I. P. C.

( 5 ) THE prosecution examined. P. Ws. 1, 3 and 4 to prove the marriage between the accused and the deceased. P. W. 1 is the father of the deceased. He deposed that he performed the marriage of the deceased with the accused in his village, Balampet, on 22-5-83. At that time the deceased failed Intermediate and the accused was doing B. A. The parents of the accused demanded a dowry of Rs. 60,000/ -. Therefore, he paid Rs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document