The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt; insufficient evidence led to the acquittal of the accused for murder while confirming convictions for dowry offences.

JUDGMENT :

N. Tukaramji, J.

1. This appeal has been directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 25.04.2023 in Sessions Case No.407 of 2018 passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Karimnagar.

2. We have heard Mr. P. Prabhaker Reddy, learned Counsel for appellant and Mr. M.Ramchandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

3. In the impugned judgment, the appellant/accused (hereinafter referred to as "the accused") was convicted and sentenced as follows: For the offence under Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act (“DP Act”), the accused was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment and a fine of Rs.15,000/-, with a default sentence of six months’ simple imprisonment. For the offence under Section 4 of the DP Act, the accused received one year of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000/- with a default sentence of one month’s simple imprisonment. Additionally, for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”) the accused was sentenced to imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life and a fine of Rs.1,000/-, with a default sentence of one month’s simple imprisonment.

4...........

(a) The prosecution’s case, in summary, is as follows: The accused married the elder daughter of the de facto complainant/PW-1. At the time of marriage, a dowry comprising Rs.2 lakhs in cash, five tolas of gold, and various household articles was presented. The couple initially enjoyed a harmonious married life and had two daughters. However, over time, the accused began to harass his wife, demanding additional dowry.

(b) In response to this harassment, PW-1, accompanied by community elders, persuaded the accused to desist and managed to arrange a further sum of Rs.5 lakhs. Despite this, about a week later, on 01.08.2018, the deceased informed her father/PW-1 that the accused had resumed his demands for an additional Rs.2 lakhs in dowry. She reported that, while intoxicated, the accused had threatened to kill her and physically assaulted her.

(c) On 02.08.2018, PW-1 and the elders hurried to the accused’s village, Kishtaraopalli, and convened a panchayat meeting. During this gathering, the accused demanded another Rs.1 lakh to clear his debts. PW-1 promised to pay this amount after selling his crop and pleaded with the accused not to harass his daughter further.

(d) Tragically, as reported by a neighbor/PW-4, on the evening of 14.08.2018, while the deceased was alone at home, the accused struck her on the head with a pestle. Hearing her cries, PW-4 rushed to the scene, but the accused fled upon seeing him. PW-4 found the deceased lying in a pool of blood and immediately informed PW-1 by phone. PW-1 and PW-4 rushed to the house, where they discovered the deceased’s body with a fatal head injury. Subsequently, PW-1 filed a police report/Ex.P-1, and after due investigation, the police filed a charge sheet against the accused.

5. During the trial, the prosecution examined witnesses PWs.1 to 16 and submitted Exhibits P-1 to P-25 and Material Objects 1 to 7. In his defence, the accused denied the incriminating evidence during his examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C., but did not present any specific evidence. However, during the cross-examination of PWs.6 and 7, portions of their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. were marked as Exhibits D-1 to D-3.

6. Upon reviewing the evidence, the learned Sessions Judge found that the giving of dowry and the subsequent demands for additional dowry were substantiated by the testimonies of family members/PWs.1 to 3 and panchayat elders/PWs.6 and 7. Furthermore, the evidence from PWs.1, 2, 6, and 7 established the cruelty inflicted by the accused in connection with these dowry demands. Medical evidence confirmed that the injuries sustained by the deceased were consistent with being struck by a pestle/M.O.3. Consequently, the accused was convicted under Sections 3 and 4 of the DP Act and Section 302 of the IPC , and sentenced accordingly.

7...........

(a) T