JUDGMENT :

C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, J.

1. The present Criminal Appeal, under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, came to be filed by one G. Padmavathi (PW-1) against the judgment of acquittal passed in Sessions Case No. 322 of 2012 on the file of VII Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Visakhapatnam. Originally, the accused were tried for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with 34 IPC and Section 304-B IPC.

2. The gravamen of the charge against the accused is that on 05.02.2011 at about 06:00 PM at Bhavanam Veedhi, Yelamanchili Town, the accused caused the death of the deceased while she was sleeping. It is said that Accused No. 3 caught hold of the legs; Accused No. 4 sat on the chest; Accused No. 2 caught hold of both the hands by pressuring to the bed; and Accused No. 1 put pressure on the neck and mouth causing the death of the deceased.

3. The facts of the case are as under:

PW-1 is the mother, PW-2 is the aunt, PW-3 is the father and PW-4 is the brother of the deceased viz. Nandini. The marriage of the deceased, who is the daughter of PWs. 1 and 3, was performed with Accused No. 1, on 01.10.2009. It is said that at the time of marriage, an amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- was paid as dowry to Accused No. 1 apart from paying Rs. 50,000/- to Accused No. 3 and sare samans worth Rs. 1,00,000/- It is said that after marriage, both of them lived happily for a very short time and thereafter Accused No. 1 and his family members started demanding the deceased to bring additional dowry. The harassment was to the effect that had Accused No. 1 married another girl, they would have got Rs. 10,00,000/- as dowry. While things stood thus, on 25.07.2010, the deceased gave birth to a female child. After delivery, the accused again started harassing the deceased on the ground that she gave birth to a female child and that the said child is dark in complexion. They also demanded Rs. 10,00,000/- for purchase of fax machine. At that time, the father of the deceased informed the accused that he is not in a position to give so much of money, but, however advised them to obtain loan by depositing the degree certificate of the deceased.

On 05.02.2011 at about 12:15 PM, PWs. 1, 2 and 4 went to Yelamanchili to see the deceased. During the said time, they requested Accused Nos. 1 and 3 to send their daughter to their house since the health of their grand daughter is not good. But they refused to send the deceased inspite of repeated requests made. At that time, the deceased informed PWs. 1 and 3 that if she is not taken with them, there is every likelihood of her being killed. It is said that while PWs. 1,2 and 4 were returning to Visakhapatnam, Accused No. 1 telephoned stating that the deceased went into her room and locked the door from inside. It is said that though they were knocking the door, there is no response from inside. Immediately thereafter, neighbors of the deceased also called PW-1 and informed that the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself to a ceiling fan. On receiving the said information, PWs. 1, 2 and 4 returned to Yelamanchili and lodged a report fixing the liability on the accused for the death of the deceased. Ex.P1 is the report. Basing on the said report, PW-13, who was working as Assistant Sub-Inspector, Yelamanchili Town Police Station, registered a case in Crime No. 10 of 2011 of Yelamanchili Town Police Station against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 304-B, 498-A IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Ex.P18 is the FIR. Further investigation in this case was taken up by PW-14, who was working as Additional S.P. in Visakhapatnam. He proceeded to the scene of offence and in the presence of PW-9, prepared an observation report of the scene, which is marked as Ex.P6. He also prepared a rough sketch of the scene, which is marked as Ex.P19. Thereafter, he sent requisition to Mandal Executive Magistrate for holding inquest over the dead body of the deceased. PW-10 who