IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATES OF TELANGANA AND ANDHRA PRADESH
C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, T. Amarnath Goud, JJ.
Dollu Venkataramana – Appellant
Versus
The State of A.P. – Respondent
Crl. A. No. 493 of 2012
Decided On : 28-08-2018
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 302 and 306 - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 106 Appeal against Conviction - Murder - Abatement of Suicide - Whether appellant killed deceased - Held, Prosecution failed to let in evidence to show that by time accused returned deceased was found alive which bear no similarity with facts of present case - By maintaining absolute silence appellant failed to discharge said burden, nature of death of deceased was homicidal - Appellant caused death of his wife - No reason to interfere with judgment of trial Court -Criminal Appeal dismissed (Paras 18 to 21)
JUDGMENT :
C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.
1. Strange are the ways of destiny. The appellant, who was presented with the chance of getting away with a lighter punishment of Imprisonment for two years for the offence under Section 306 IPC, dug his own grave by filing an appeal and suffered conviction for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and sentence for Imprisonment of Life for killing his pregnant wife.
2. The case of the Prosecution, in brief, is stated hereunder:
One Dollu Eswaramma (hereinafter referred to as "the deceased"), who is the daughter of PWs. 6 and 7, married the deceased on 13.04.2001 at Parvathipuram Rural Police Station against the will of their respective parents. After the marriage, the couple left Parvathipuram Village to Eluru to eke out their livelihood by doing coolie work. During the wedlock, the deceased became pregnant. The appellant developed an evil idea of remarriage for the purpose of dowry. He along with the deceased came down to Vizianagaram on 08.08.2001, stayed in Room No. 2 of Simhadri Lodge and with an evil intention to end the life of the deceased, shifted to Subhodhaya lodge on 09.08.2001 with false names and address. He made the deceased believe that they shall end their lives as they could not get proper livelihood. In continuation of his plan, the appellant purchased five tablets of Inderol each from PWs. 11 and 12 on 09.08.2001 and administered them to the deceased. As the said tablets did not cause effective sleep and while the deceased was in an unconscious state, the appellant tied a saree around her neck and hanged her to the ceiling fan, due to which she died. PW-2 room boy, while cleaning the lodge, pushed the doors of the said room and saw the appellant tying the saree to the fan and also to the neck of the deceased. As the appellant threatened PW-2 with dire consequences, if he reveals the same to others, the latter remained silent. Thereafter, the appellant locked the said room and went away. PW-4 painter, who was engaged to paint Room No. 104, found the said room locked and informed the same to PW-3 by suspecting something. Later, the lock of the said room was broke open by PWs. 2 and 4, who found the dead body of the deceased hung to the ceiling fan with a saree. PW-5 occupant of Room No. 103 and PW-1 the owner of the lodge also witnessed the same. On 10.08.2001, PW-1 gave a report to PW-21 Sub-Inspector of Police, II Town Police Station, Vizianagaram, who registered the same as Crime No. 89 of 2001 under Section 174 Cr.P.C.
3. During the investigation, PW-21 proceeded to the scene of offence, recorded the statements of PWs. 1 to 5 and LW-5 Himandu Apparao, observed the scene of offence in the presence of PW-14 and LW-17 Kanakala Sankara Prasad, seized MOs.1 to 3, held inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of PW-14 and LWs. 17 to 20, sent the same for Post-mortem examination to PW-15 and got the scene of offence photographed through PW-10. PW-15, who conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased, found a ligature mark around the neck of the deceased and hyoid bone fracture and opined that the deceased died of ante-mortem hanging. Later, PW-21 altered the provision of Law and sent the express FIRs to all the Officers concerned.
4. PW-22 Inspector of Police, Vizianagaram, took up the investigation from PW-21, re-examined PWs. 2, 3 and 7, recorded their statements, arrested the appellant on 03.09.2001 at 10.30 a.m. near Tea-stall at Railway Station, Vizianagaram. The appellant confessed the guilt in the presence of PW-16 and LW-22 Meesala Suri Ramulu, and he was sent to judicial custody. During the Test Identification Parade, PW-2 identified the appellant. After completion of the investigation, receipt of RFSL report and collection of the relevant material, the charge sheet was filed.
5. Based on the chargesheet and the material collected by the Investigating Officer, the lower Court has framed the following charges:
"That you accused married Dollu Dwar
Babu and Others vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Munish Mubar vs. State of Haryana
Phula Singh vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Raj Kumar Singh @ Raju @ Batya vs. State of Rajasthan
R. Rajendran Nair vs. State of Kerala
Ram Gulam Chaudhury vs. State of Bihar
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.