Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
K SURESH REDDY, T.C.D.SEKHAR, JJ
Duvvati Babu Rao, S/o. Ramulu – Appellant
Versus
State Of AP rep PP, through the Inspector of Police, Korukonda Circle, East Godavari District, Rep.by the Public Prosecutor, – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(K. Suresh Reddy, J.)
Sole accused in Sessions Case No.16 of 2015 on the file of the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, East Godavari District at Rajamahendravaram, is the appellant. He was tried by the learned Sessions Judge under two charges.
2. The 1st charge is under Section 498-A IPC and the 2nd charge is under Section 302 IPC.
3. Substance of the charge is that prior to 27.06.2014 the accused used to harass his wife by name Duvvati Venkata Lakshmi @ Lakshmi (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') subjecting her to cruelty and used to beat her suspecting her fidelity and on 27.06.2014 at about 2.00 P.M. the accused having quarreled with the deceased, poured kerosene on her and set her to fire and while undergoing treatment she succumbed to injuries on 02.07.2014, thereby committed offences punishable under Sections. 498-A and 302 IPC.
4. After completion of trial, learned Sessions Judge while acquitting the appellant under Section 498-A IPC, convicted the accused under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for 'LIFE' and also to pay fine of Rs.2000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three (03) months. Aggrieved by the same
The court determined that the accused's actions constituted culpable homicide not amounting to murder, based on the nature of injuries and intent, leading to a conviction under Section 304 Part-II IP....
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in dying declarations led to acquittal for murder while confirming conviction for cruelty.
The court established that actions leading to death can be classified as culpable homicide not amounting to murder based on the circumstances and intent.
The court affirmed the conviction for murder and destruction of evidence, emphasizing the accused's failure to provide a reasonable explanation for the death of his wife.
The court affirmed that corroborated dying declarations are reliable for establishing guilt in homicide cases, especially when the accused fails to provide a plausible explanation under Section 106 o....
Inconsistent dying declarations cannot support a conviction for murder under IPC Section 302.
The court established that insufficient evidence of intent to kill led to a conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 part II IPC instead of murder under Section 302 ....
The court established that inconsistencies in witness testimonies and dying declarations can lead to reasonable doubt, necessitating the acquittal of the accused.
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.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
