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

2023 Supreme(AP) 1247

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
A.V.Ravindra Babu, J.
Kotakonda Dharmaiah - Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 989 of 2010
Decided On : 13-10-2023

Advocates appeared:
T.D.Phani Kumar, Advocate, Harinath Reddy Soma, Advocate, N.Sravan Kumar, Advocate

The prosecution established that the accused subjected the deceased to continuous harassment for dowry, leading to her suicide within seven years of marriage, warranting conviction under Section 304-B IPC.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 304-B - Appeal against conviction of accused for dowry death - Accused found guilty of subjecting deceased to cruelty due to dowry demands, leading to her suicide within 7 years of marriage - Conviction supported by statements of witnesses regarding harassment and demand for dowry. (Paras 2, 16, 62)

(B) Evidence - Proximity test for dowry death - Continuous nature of harassment needs to be established, but evidence showed that demands were made soon before the death. (Paras 11, 56)

Facts of the case:
The appellant faced trial for the death of K. Varalakshmi, who committed suicide following harassment for dowry. Her family provided evidence regarding demands made for additional dowry leading up to her death. (Paras 2-5, 7-9)

Findings of Court:
The evidence established that the appellant was responsible for managing circumstances that led to the deceased's suicide, affirming the charge under Section 304-B IPC. (Paras 62-63)

Issues: Main questions included whether the prosecution proved that the death was unnatural and whether there was sufficient evidence of harassment linked to dowry demands. (Paras 13, 34)

Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that a close relationship exists between dowry demands and the deceased’s suicide, with evidence satisfying legal requirements for conviction under Section 304-B. The presumption of guilt lies with the accused in dowry death cases. (Paras 54-62)

Result: Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence confirmed.

Table of Content
1. facts of the case and procedural background. (Para 1 , 2 , 4)
2. the court reviews the judgment and proceedings leading to the appeal. (Para 3)
3. facts surrounding the death of the victim and initial investigations are presented. (Para 5)
4. procedural developments and challenges in establishing the timeline of events. (Para 6)
5. scope of the appeal and identification of parties. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
6. points of determination in the appeal. (Para 13 , 14)
7. defense argues the prosecution's failure to establish key elements of the case. (Para 15 , 16)
8. arguments related to dowry harassment and proof of death circumstances. (Para 49 , 50 , 61)
9. the court affirms the prosecution's argument linking harassment to the victim's death. (Para 54)
10. conclusion upholding conviction and appeal's dismissal. (Para 62 , 63 , 64)

JUDGMENT

A.V.RAVINDRA BABU, J. - The judgment, dtd. 6/8/2010, in Sessions Case No.25 of 2008 on the file of the Court of Special Sessions Judge-cum-IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chittoor at Tirupati (for short, "the learned Additional Sessions Judge"), is under challenge in the present Criminal Appeal filed by the appellant, who was the unsuccessful accused No.1 in the aforesaid Sessions Case.

2. The appellant herein (A-1) faced trial under Sec. 304-B of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (for short, "the IPC") before the learned Additional Sessions Judge and he was found guilty of the charge under Sec. 304-B IPC as such he was convicted under Sec. 235(2) Cr.P.C and was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 7 years.

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

4. The Sessions Case No.25 of 2008 arose out of the committal order in Preliminary Registration Case (PRC) No.53 of 2007 on the file of the Court of III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupati (for short, "the learned Magistrate") pertaining to Crime No.6 of 2007 of Chandragiri Police Station, Chittoor District for the offence under Sec. 304-B IPC.

5. The Sub-Divisional Police Officer (SDPO), Tirupati (LW.23) filed charge sheet in Crime No.6 of 2007 of Chandragiri Police Station alleging the offence under Sec. 304-B IPC against the accused Nos.1 to 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, as set out in the charge sheet, is as follows:

(i) The marriage of K. Varalakshmi (hereinafter referred to as "the deceased") was celebrated with one K. Dharmaiah (A-1) 6 years prior to the incident, as per the Hindu rites and customs. At that time, parents of the deceased gave cash of Rs.30, 000.00 and 8 sovereigns of gold ornaments, apart from the household articles. After marriage, the deceased joined with the company of accused and lived happily for 10 days. Later, all the accused started harassing the deceased for want of additional articles and Ugadi Sangyam. The parents of the deceased failed to comply their demand. On that count, accused continuously harassed the deceased both physically and mentally. In this connection, Dalavayi Mani Kumar @ Mani (LW.6) and Pediri Krishna Reddy (LW.7) held mediation many times but in vain. The sister-in-law of the deceased viz., Rekha also threatened the deceased for want of additional dowry and instigated accused No.1 to demand additional amounts from the deceased. Deceased informed her parents about the harassment made by all the accused. Ultimately, unable to bear with the harassment, the deceased, on 8/1/2007, committed suicide by consuming pesticide poison. Having come to know about the incident, Valipi Nagamma (LW.1), mother of the deceased, presented a report to the Police. (ii) On the strength of the report made by the mother of deceased, the Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, Chandragiri Police Station (LW.22), registered the report as a case in Crime No.6 of 2007 for the offence under Sec. 304-B IPC and submitted copies of FIR to all the concerned. The SDPO, Tirupati (LW.23), during

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