JUDGMENT :

This Criminal Appeal is filed by the appellant, who was the accused in Sessions Case No.1 of 2010, on the file of XI Additional District & Sessions Judge (FTC), Guntur District at Tenali (“the learned Additional Sessions Judge” for short), challenging the judgment, dated 23.11.2010, where under the learned Additional Sessions Judge, found the accused not guilty of the offences under Sections 302 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code (“I.P.C.” for short) and acquitted her under Section 235(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (“Cr.P.C.” for short), but, found her guilty of the offence under Section 307 of I.P.C. and convicted her under Section 235(2) of Cr.P.C. After questioning the accused about the quantum of sentence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, sentenced her to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 307 of I.P.C. Felt aggrieved of the said conviction and sentence in S.C.No.1 of 2010 as above, the unsuccessful accused filed the present Criminal Appeal, challenging the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge.

2. The parties to this Criminal Appeal will hereinafter be referred as described before the trial Court for the sake of convenience.

3. The Sessions Case No.1 of 2010 arose out of a committal order passed in P.R.C.No.20 of 2009, on the file of Additional Junior Civil Judge, Repalle, pertaining to Crime No.76 of 2009 of Repalle Police Station under Sections 302, 307, 326 and 324 of I.P.C.

4. The case of the prosecution, in brief, according to the charge sheet filed in the above said Crime Number by the Inspector of Police, Repalle, is as follows:

(i) The accused is resident of Kanagalavaripalem Village, Karakatta. Accused is a woman and she is no other than the daughter-in-law of one Viswanadhapalli Appalaswamy, S/o Raghavaiah, aged 60 years (hereinafter will be referred to as “deceased”). L.W.1-Nadakuditi Rajyalaxmi is the neighbour to the house of the accused and deceased and distinct relative of the accused. L.W.6-Nadikuditi Sridevi and L.W.7-Nadikuditi Nagasudha are the injured. The deceased used to live by fishing and by coolie works. The kith and kin of the deceased used to stay by the side of his house in separate houses. All of them erected their huts in Krishna Karakatta. The accused is no other than the daughter-in-law of the deceased. The injured girls L.W.6 and L.W.7 are no other than the brother’s daughters of the accused.

(ii) The marriage of one Devika, who is the elder daughter of the accused, was fixed to be celebrated in Tirupati on 09.04.2009. The accused disliked the marriage profile of her would be son-in-law. On 08.04.2009 the husband of the accused and his other kith and kin went to Tirupati to celebrate the marriage of Devika by leaving the accused alone at the house. She got furious about the fact that she was left in the house by the inmates when the marriage of her elder sister is going to be performed at Tirupati. She suspected that the deceased, L.W.6 and L.W.7, injured, are responsible in fixing the marriage profile of her daughter against her will and that they played main role in leaving her at home without allowing her to attend the marriage at Tirupati.

(iii) While so, on 09.04.2009 the accused along with L.W.8-Nadakuditi Nagendramma, the mother of the accused, slept on one cot inside the house of the accused. The deceased, who is father-in-law of the accused, slept on a separate cot in front of the house of the accused under the marriage pendyal. All of sudden, at 3-30 a.m., accused woke up, came out of the house, picked up a big Axe and hacked over the throat and beard portions of the deceased when he slept on the cot five times with the said Axe and caused his instantaneous death. Suddenly, the mother of the accused (L.W.8) woke up from the sleep and to her dismay found that the accused is not found on the cot. Hence, she came out of the house