SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(AP) 5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, K. MANMADHA RAO, JJ.
Harijana Anantha Raju – Petitioner
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1045 of 2015
Decided On : 03-01-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: D. Kodandarami Reddy.

Point of Law: Dowry death – Conviction upheld - Prosecution succeeded in establishing the guilt of the appellant/accused beyond reasonable doubt and the trial court rightly convicted the appellant.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 498A and 302 – Criminal Procedure Code,1973 – Section 207,209 and 313 – Dowry demand – Murder – Harassment and cruelty – Dying declaration - PW-1 is father, while PW-2 is brother, of deceased - Marriage of deceased was performed with accused about 10 to 12 years prior to date of incident - It is said that, after marriage, both of them started living in Village - They were blessed with a male and a female child - For some time, both of them lived happily and disputes arose when accused developed illicit intimacy with another lady in village - It is said that, on one occasion, accused broke head of deceased, pursuant to which, PW-1 took her to his house and after healing all wounds a panchayat was conducted - After the panchayat, deceased was sent to house of the accused - It is said that, accused used to beat deceased whenever deceased questioned him about his illicit intimacy with another woman in village - Whether prosecution was able to bring home guilt of accused beyond doubt for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 498A IPC.

Finding of the Court:

Court do not find any inconsistency in two dying declarations recorded by two authorities - Even learned counsel for appellant did not point out any inconsistencies in two dying declarations recorded by Police and the Magistrate - Apart from that, a perusal of the two dying statements disclose that before recording statements, Magistrate obtained certificate from the Doctor (PW-11) with regard to mental condition and after recording statement, another certificate was obtained from Doctor (PW-11) with regard to the mental condition of the injured - In both certificates, it has been stated that deceased was conscious, coherent and in a fit state of mind to give statement - In fact, PW-11 is the doctor, who translated from Kannada to Telugu - She was subjected to cross-examination but nothing useful has been elicited to discredit the same - Suggestion that she colluded with PW-10 and made this declaration at instance of relatives of injured was denied - She categorically stated that, she assisted the Magistrate in translation, as she knew Kannada and her services were utilized by Magistrate - For the aforesaid reasons, court are of the view that prosecution succeeded in establishing guilt of appellant/accused beyond reasonable doubt and trial court rightly convicted appellant.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, J.

1. Sole accused in Sessions Case No. 123 of 2013 on the file of Additional Sessions Judge, Hindupur, is the appellant herein. He was tried for offences punishable under Sections 498A and 302 of Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.). By its Judgment, dated 20.04.2015, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the accused under both the counts and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. He was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 498-A I.P.C. The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. The gravamen of the charge against the accused is that, the accused being the husband of Bhagya Lakshmi (Deceased), used to harass her and on 20.12.2012 caused her death by pouring kerosene and setting her on fire.

3. The facts, as uncovered from the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, are as under:

    (i) PW-1 is the father, while PW-2 is the brother, of the deceased. The marriage of deceased-Bhagya Lakshmi was performed with the accused about 10 to 12 years prior to the date of incident. It is said that, after marriage, both of them started living in Kodagarlagutta Village, Rolla Mandal. They were blessed with a male and a female child. For some time, both of them lived happily and, thereafter, disputes arose when the accused developed illicit intimacy with another lady in the village. It is said that, on one occasion, the accused broke the head of the deceased, pursuant to which, PW-1 took her to his house and after healing all the wounds a panchayat was conducted. After the panchayat, the deceased was sent to the house of the accused. It is said that, accused used to beat the deceased whenever the deceased questioned him about his illicit intimacy with another woman in the village.

(ii) On the fateful day, there was a quarrel between the accused and the deceased when she questioned the accused about the illegal intimacy. The said quarrel took place while the deceased was in the kitchen. It is said that, with an intention to kill her, the accused poured kerosene on the body and set her on fire. On hearing the cries, the neighbours came, covered the body with blanket, put off the flames and then took her to the hospital. Intimation about the admission of the injured in the hospital was furnished to PW-1 by the authorities in the Government Hospital at Madakasira. Thereafter, the injured was shifted to Government Hospital, Hindupur, for better treatment. The doctors at Hindupur advised to take the deceased to Government Hospital at Ananthapuram, for better treatment. It is said that the deceased was conscious and coherent both at Madakasira and Hindupur Government Hospitals. But, however, became unconscious when they reached the Government Hospital, Ananthapuram.

(iii) On 20.12.2012 at about 8.30 a.m. PW-9 Sub-Inspector of Police, Madakasira Police Station, received intimation from the Government Hospital about admission of the injured (deceased) in the hospital. He proceeded to the Government Hospital and found the injured (deceased) with burns in general ward. She was conscious and coherent and her mental state was normal. He recorded the statement of the injured (deceased), which was marked as Ex.P9. After recording the statement of the injured, he obtained certificate of the doctor with regard to the mental status of the injured (deceased). However, on point of local limits, the statement was sent to Rolla Police Station, for registering of a case in the said police station.

(iv) It is to be noted here that, PW-11 who was working as Civil Assistant Surgeon, Area Hospital, Madakasira, sent intimation to Judicial First Class Magistrate, Madakasira (PW-10), for recording the statement of the injured (deceas

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon Back to top