Back
M. LAXMAN, G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
Sinde Nago Rao – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
G.ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. - This appeal is filed by the de facto complainant, challenging the judgment dtd. 22/2/2012 passed in S.C.No.175 of 2011 on the file of Principal Sessions Judge, Adilabad, acquitting respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein, who are Accused Nos.1 to 3 and who were charged with the offences punishable under Ss. 302 r/w. 34 and 302-B r/w.34 of IPC.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the 1st respondent-State and the learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4/Accused Nos.1 to 3. Perused the record.
3. The case of the appellant is that he performed the marriage of his daughter (deceased) with Accused No.1 on 23/11/2009 by agreeing to pay dowry of Rs.1,50,000.00 and paid an amount of Rs.1,00,000.00 and also given a motorcycle to accused No.1 apart from jewelry items and other house hold articles. He also promised to pay the balance dowry amount of Rs.50,000.00 at the time of Diwali festival of 2010. The deceased and Accused No.1 lived happily for some time and thereafter, all the accused harassed the deceased with a demand for additional dowry and due to their unbearable harassment, the deceased went to her
Point of Law : If two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial court.
A conviction under IPC Sections 498-A and 304-B requires clear evidence of a direct link between cruelty and the death, which was not proven in this case.
The judgment highlights the importance of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the presumption of innocence, and the need for compelling reasons to reverse an acquittal.
Point of Law : Prosecution has failed to prove the guilt against the accused. [Para 39]
The requirement of substantial evidence of dowry-related harassment is essential to sustain a conviction under Section 304-B of IPC, which the prosecution failed to demonstrate.
Point of Law : The scope of Section 378 of Cr.P.C., in dealing with an appeal against the order of acquittal is to be borne in mind.
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
