The court highlighted the necessity of corroborative evidence in witness testimonies, particularly concerning juvenile witnesses.

1. The sole accused in SC No. 223 of 2008 on the file of II Additional Sessions Judge, Karimnagar at Jagtial, filed this Criminal Appeal, feeling aggrieved by the conviction and sentence ordered against him by the trial Court, through judgment, dated 17.04.2009.

2. The appellant was tried for the offences punishable under S.302 and S.323 IPC, for committing the murder of his wife, Vollem Laxmi, on 10.09.2007, and causing a minor injury to his son, Vollem Manideep, by pushing him aside. The trial Court convicted the appellant for both the offences and imposed punishment of imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month, for the offence punishable under S.302 IPC, and fine of Rs.250/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one week, for the offence punishable under S.323 IPC.

3 The case, as projected by the prosecution, was that the appellant was married to the deceased, Laxmi, and the couple had two children. The appellant was said to be employed in Dubai, and he suspected the fidelity of his wife, who was staying with her parents at Gambheerpur village. The accused is a native of Yakeenpur village of Karimnagar District. He is said to have come back from Dubai in the month of August, 2007, and when he went to the house of the parents of the deceased, with a request to send his wife along with him, his mother - in - law (PW 1) is said to have declared that her daughter would be sent to his house, only after the disputes between them are settled, and very shortly, she would visit his village together with elders.

4. On 10.09.2007, PW 1, along with her sons, the deceased and her children, and elders of the village, is said to have come to Yakeenpur village, where the elders chosen by the accused were also present. After discussion, it was said to have been decided that the deceased should stay with the accused and the latter should look after her with affection, and that PW 1 left that place in the afternoon. On the same day, PW 1 is said to have received information to the effect that the appellant beat the deceased with a wooden pestle and used an electric wire to strangulate her, and that when the minor son came in the way, he has been pushed aside.

5. PW 1 submitted a complaint (Ex.P.1) to the P.S. Korutla. That gave rise to registration of Crime No.182 of 2007 and investigation was taken up by the Investigating Officer (PW 17). During the course of investigation, PW 17 visited the site and got the inquest panchanama conducted and arranged for post mortem. The post mortem report revealed that there are five injuries on the body of the deceased, and out of them, injury No.3, a ligature mark of 1/2 inch x 10 cm. around the neck, is the cause of death. PW 17 apprehended the accused on 19.09.2007 and recovered the material objects, that are said to have been used for committing the murder. After conducting the investigation, he filed charge sheet, wherein, the offences under S.302 and S.323 IPC were alleged against the accused.

6. On committal, the case was taken up by the Court of II Additional Sessions Judge, Karimnagar at Jagtial, as SC No. 223 of 2008 and charges referable to S.302 and S.323 IPC were framed. On denial of the charges by the accused, detailed trial was conducted, wherein P.Ws. 1 to 17 were examined and Exs. P1 to P.21 were marked. The trial Court has also taken on record the material objects as M.Os 1 to 9. The contradiction in the statement of PW 6 was marked as Ex. D1. The requirement under S.313 Cr.P.C. was complied with, and on the basis of the evidence be