The judgment established the application of statutory presumptions and the proximity test in proving dowry death, emphasizing the burden of proof on the accused for facts within their exclusive knowledge.

JUDGMENT :

Challenge in this Criminal Appeal is to the judgment, dated 12.10.2009 in Sessions Case No.628 of 2008, on the file of I Additional District & Sessions Judge, Guntur (“Additional Sessions Judge” for short), whereunder the leaned Additional Sessions Judge, found the accused guilty of the charge under Sections 304-B as well as 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (“IPC” for short), convicted him under Section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (“Cr.P.C.” for short) and after questioning him about the quantum of sentence, sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years for the charge under Section 304-B of IPC and further sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 15 days for the charge under Section 498-A of IPC and that both the sentences shall run concurrently.

2. The parties to this Criminal Appeal will hereinafter be referred to as described before the learned Additional Sessions Judge for the sake of convenience.

3. The Sessions Case No.628 of 2008 arose out of a committal order in PRC.No.77 of 2008, on the file of Additional Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri, pertaining to Crime No.12 of 2007 of Tadikonda police station.

4. The case of the prosecution, in brief, according to the contents of charge sheet filed by the State, represented by the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Guntur Rural Police Station, is as follows:

(i) One Mamidi Mariamma (hereinafter will be called as “deceased”) is the wife of the accused. Their marriage took place about five years back. The accused and the deceased lived happily for about two years and they have begotten two children. Thereafter the accused got addicted to alcohol and started harassing the deceased by subjecting her to both physically and mentally for additional dowry. The deceased informed her parents, P.W.1 and P.W.9, who on the first occasion gave a ceiling fan and cash of Rs.5,000/- to the accused. The accused was not satisfied and continued harassing the deceased on one pretext or the other. About three months prior to the date of offence, the deceased and the accused came to the house of P.W.1 and P.W.9 at Nidumukkala Village. As per the demand of the accused, P.W.1 and P.W.9 purchased a shebuffalo worth about Rs.9,500/- and gave it to the accused. Still the accused continued to harass the deceased in spite of his parents’ reprimanding him.

(ii) On 01.12.2007 at about 7-00 p.m., a quarrel took place between the deceased and the accused as the deceased intended to present clothes to her sister which was refused by the accused on the ground that he had no money. Then the deceased questioned the accused how he has got money for consuming alcohol. Then the accused beat the deceased in the presence of his mother and P.W.2 who reprimanded the accused, and sent him away. The mother of the accused along with the son of the accused left the house for prayers leaving the deceased alone in the house. The deceased having got vexed with the attitude of her husband, committed suicide by consuming poison.

(iii) On a report given by P.W.1 on 02.02.2007, P.W.7 registered the crime and P.W.8 took up the investigation. Inquest was held over the body of the deceased by P.W.5, the Mandal Revenue Officer and other panch witnesses. The body of the deceased was sent for postmortem examination. The doctor, who conducted autopsy, opined that the deceased appears to have been died due to Organo Phosphorous poison. During the course of investigation, P.W.8 visited the scene of offence, observed the scene, seized the material objects available at the scene of offence, prepared a rough sketch and recorded the statements of the witnesses. The material objects were sent to the RFSL for analysis. During the course of investigation, the accused was arrested on 06.02.2007 and sent for remand. After completion of investigation, a charge sheet was filed before the Additional Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri.

5. The l