IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
K.Suresh Reddy, Subba Reddy Satti, JJ.
Malkari Radha Bai and another – Appellants
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor – Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos.2301 and 2600 of 2018
Decided On : 05-01-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. charges against accused related to dowry death and cruelty. (Para 4 , 5 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. arguments for and against the accused's conviction. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 3. overview of sections 304-b ipc and 113-b of the evidence act. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. key considerations for proving dowry death. (Para 20 , 22 , 23) |
| 5. court's doubt on the credibility of prosecution witnesses. (Para 25 , 29) |
| 6. conclusion overturning the trial court's conviction. (Para 30) |
JUDGMENT :
Subba Reddy Satti, J.
Since both the Criminal Appeals arise out of the same Sessions Case, i.e., S.C.No.218 of 2017, on the file of the Court of VI Additional Sessions Judge, Anantapuramu, at Gooty, they are heard together and disposed of by way of this common judgment.
2. Accused Nos.2 & 3 in the above Sessions Case filed Criminal Appeal No.2301 of 2018 and accused No.1 filed Criminal Appeal No.2600 of 2018. They were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge under the following charges:
The first charge was under Section 498-A IPC.
The last charge was under Section 304-B r/w 34 IPC or 302 IPC.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties to this common judgment are referred to as they were arrayed in S.C.No.218 of 2017.
4. Substance of the charge is that A-1 being husband, A-2 and A-3 being in-laws of M.Lakshmi Rajyam @ Rajya Lakshmi (hereinafter referred to as deceased), subjected her to cruelty for want of additional dowry; that the deceased died on 04.03.2016 at about 7.00 p.m. by falling under a train, within 7 years of marriage; the accused subjected the deceased to cruelty soon before her death and thus, committed offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 304-B r/w 34 or 302 IPC.
5. After completion of trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted accused No.1 under Section 304-B I.P.C. and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for ‘LIFE’. The learned Additional Sessions Judge further convicted accused No.1 under Section 498-A I.P.C. and sentenced him to suffer Simple Imprisonment for three years and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to suffer Simple Imprisonment for one month. The learned Additional Sessions Judge further convicted accused Nos.2 and 3 under Section 304-B I.P.C. and sentenced each one of them to suffer Simple Imprisonment for a period of seven years. The learned Additional Sessions Judge also convicted accused Nos.2 and 3 under Section 498-A I.P.C. and sentenced them to suffer Simple Imprisonment for a period of one year and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each, in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for one month. Both the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants field a memo vide USR No.141377/2025 stating that appellant No.2/accused No.3 in Crl.A.No.2301 of 2018 died pending the appeal. In view of the said fact, Crl.A.No.2301 of 2018, by order dated 18.12.2025, was dismissed as abated insofar as appellant No.2/accused No.3 is concerned. Both the appeals are taken up for hearing insofar as accused Nos.1 and 2 are concerned.
7. Case of the prosecution, as emanated from the evidence, briefly, is as follows:
(i) P.W.3 is the father, P.W.4 is the brother, and P.W.10 is the paternal uncle of the deceased, respectively. A-1 is the husband, A-2 and A-3 are in-law of the deceased respectively. The marriage between the deceased and A-1 was solemnised about 6 years prior to the date of incident. At the time of marriage, P.W.1 gave Rs.5,00,000/- and 150 grams of gold and other household articles towards dowry. One month after the marriage, all the accused started harassing the deceased to bring gold ornaments and Pattu clothes towards ‘Vadibiyyam’ every year from her parents. The accused also harassed the deceased, as she failed to conceive children. P.W.1 took the deceased to the hospital in Hyderabad, where fertility tests were conducted, and no defect was found with the deceased. P.Ws.3 and 10 went to the house of accused and gave Rs.50,000/- to A-1 and chastised them to le
Kamesh Panjiyar v. State of Bihar
State of Rajasthan v. Teg Bahadur and Others
Prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in dowry death cases; lack of sufficient evidence to establish ongoing harassment led to acquittal.
The court mandated that for a conviction under Section 304-B IPC, the prosecution must demonstrate a proximate link between cruelty and the death, which was found lacking in this case.
To sustain a conviction under Section 304B IPC, the prosecution must establish a proximate link between dowry-related cruelty and the victim's death within seven years of marriage, demonstrating that....
The court affirmed the conviction under Section 304-B IPC, establishing that the deceased was subjected to cruelty for dowry demands, leading to her suicide, thus satisfying the legal requirements fo....
The court ruled that to establish dowry death under Section 304B IPC, the prosecution must show cruelty for dowry was inflicted soon before the victim's death, with a clear link between the two.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that to convict an accused under Section 304-B IPC, the prosecution must prove that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connecti....
The prosecution must establish all ingredients of Section 304B IPC, including demand for dowry soon before death, to invoke presumption of guilt under Section 113B of the Evidence Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.