IMPORTANT POINT
The court reinforced the principle that when a death occurs in a domestic setting, the burden of explanation lies on the accused, particularly under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act.

JUDGMENT :

K. Suresh Reddy, J.

Accused No.1 in Sessions Case No.44 of 2016 on the file of the Court of XIII Additional Sessions Judge, Narasaraopet, Guntur District, is the appellant in the present Criminal Appeal. He along with his mother i.e., Accused No.2 were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge under five (05) charges. The first charge was under Section 498-A IPC against Accused No.1, the second charge was under Section 304-B IPC against Accused No.1, the third charge was under Section 302 IPC against Accused No.1, the fourth charge was under Section 201 IPC against Accused No.1 and the last charge was under Section 201 IPC against Accused No.2.

2. Substance of the charge is that Accused No.1 used to harass his wife, by name Annam Koteswaramma @ Rupa (hereinafter referred to as the deceased), subjected her to cruelty, demanding her to bring additional dowry and on 24.09.2015 he caused her death by pressing her neck with force and by throttling her and to screen the evidence, he tied the body to a saree and hanged the body to a ceiling fan, thereby committed offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 302 and 201 IPC. After completion of trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge while acquitting Accused No.2 for the charge levelled against her, convicted the Accused No.1 under Section 498-A IPC and sentenced him to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of two (02) years. The learned Additional Sessions Judge further convicted Accused No.1 under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for “LIFE” and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default, to suffer Simple Imprisonment for a period of three (03) months. The learned Additional Sessions Judge also convicted Accused No.1 under Section 304-B IPC of course, no separate sentence was awarded as he was sentenced to imprisonment for “LIFE” under Section 302 IPC. Both the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

3. Heard Smt. J. Sreelakshmi, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Sri. Soora Venkata Sainath, learned Special Public Prosecutor.

4. Case of the prosecution, as per the evidence of prosecution witnesses, is as follows:-

Accused Nos.1 and 2 are residents of Narasaraopet town, Accused No.2 is the mother of Accused No.1. Accused No.1 was working as a clerk in a local vegetable market. The marriage between the Accused No.1 and deceased was performed on 31.01.2013 at Bapatla. PW-1 is the father, PW-2 is the mother of the deceased, PW-3 is the cousin of PW-1 and PW-4 is the brother-inlaw of PW-1. The parents of the deceased are residents of Bapatla Town. At the time of marriage, PW-1 paid an amount of Rs.1,10,000/- to the Accused No.1 towards dowry apart from giving house hold articles. After marriage, the deceased joined matrimonial home at Narasaraopet. Three months after the marriage, Accused No.1 and the deceased went to Bapatla, where Accused No.1 fell ill due to Dengue fever. Accused No.1 and the deceased remained at the house of PWs-1 and 2 for a period of two (02) months and thereafter Accused No.1 left for Narasaraopet, leaving the deceased at the house of her parents. Subsequently, after six (06) months, Accused No.1 set up his family at Narasaraopet along with the deceased. After the deceased joining at Narasaraopet, she informed PW-1 over phone stating that Accused No.1 is ill-treating her and demanding her to bring more money towards additional dowry. After sometime, PW-6-caste elder telephoned to PW-1 and informed him that both the accused are harassing the deceased. Having come to know the same, PW-1 went to Narasaraopet and placed the matter before the elders-PWs-6 and 8. The elders chastised the accused. PWs-6 and 8 advised Accused Nos.1 and 2 to look after the deceased well. Thereafter, the couple were sent to Ponnur, where the senior paternal uncle and aunt of Accused No.1 are staying. There also, the accused used to ill-treat the deceased having addicted to alcohol. PWs-9 and 6 admonished the accused a