Point of law : chemical analysis reveal existence of Endosulfan, an insecticide poison, in the viscera. Therefore, the medical evidence amply supports the case of the prosecution with regard to the cause of death of the deceased.

JUDGMENT :

C. Praveen Kumar, J.

Sole accused, in Sessions Case No.237 of 2011 on the file of the learned IV Additional District & Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam, the appellant herein, was tried for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 304-B, 498-A, 449 of Indian Penal Code [for short, “I.P.C.”] and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 [for short, “D.P. Act”].

2. Vide its judgment, dated 26.06.2014, the learned Sessions Judge while acquitting the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 304-B, 498-A of I.P.C. and Section 4 of D.P. Act, convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 449 of I.P.C. and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one (1) month for the offence punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C. He was further sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of three (03) years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one (1) month for the offence punishable under Section 449 of I.P.C. The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

3. The gravamen of the charge against the accused is that on 17.11.2010 at about 2.30 PM, at K. Jagannadhapuram, K. Kotapadu Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, the accused caused the death of his wife Kotana Dhana Lakshmi [here-in-after referred to as “deceased”] by hitting her with a stick on her head and administering Endosulfan poison.

4. The facts, as revealed from the evidence of prosecution witnesses, as under:

(i) P.W.1 is the father of the deceased while P.W.2 is the brother of the deceased. P.W.3 is the cousin of the deceased while P.W.5 is the nephew of P.W.1. The marriage of the deceased with the accused, took place about seven years prior i.e., in the year 2007. At the time of marriage, P.W.1 presented Rs.1,00,000/- cash as dowry, Rs.10,000/- towards Aadapaduchu lanchanalu and one gold chain and gold ring to the accused. They also gave some furniture and sare samanulu worth Rs.50,000/-. Both of them lived happily for some time and they blessed with a female child. Thereafter, disputes arose between them.

(ii) It is said that the accused demanded some more dowry to clear his loans. P.W.1 is said to have pledged his gold articles at Indian Bank and gave Rs.30,000/- to the accused and also Rs.5000/- at the time of birth of his granddaughter. It is also said that at the instance of P.W.1, P.W.2 the brother of the deceased, gave Rs.40,000/- in two spells to the accused, on the demand made by the accused. It is said that because of disputes, the deceased came to the house of P.W.1 along with his grand-daughter. When questioned as to why she came there, it was informed to P.W.1 that she will not go again to the house of the accused. Subsequently, the mother of the accused came there along with the village elders, pacified P.W.1 and his daughter and took her back stating she would treat her well.

(iii) At the time of festival, P.W.1 brought his daughter to his house. Later, the accused came and took his granddaughter on the pretext of birth day function of his niece. Sometime later, the mother of the accused called P.W.1, stating that the accused is threatening to commit suicide by consuming poison and also administer poison to the daughter of P.W.1, (deceased). On hearing the same, P.W.2 and his wife (G. Demudamma) and one Y. Mahalakshmamma (P.W.5) went to the house of the accused in an Auto and brought her back.

(iv) On the early morning of next day, the accused came to the house of P.W.1 and when he was about to leave at 8.00 AM, the accused was asked as to where he was going. The accused informed that he will be back at 11.00 AM. At about 11.00 AM, the accused came and enquired about his wife. P.W.1 who was present in the house, informed the accused that his daughter and daughter-in-law went to fields for cutting the crop. But the accused asked