JUDGMENT:

1. The appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 304- II IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years vide judgment in S.C.No.360 of 2010 dated 28.06.2011 passed by the Sessions Judge at Nizamabad. Aggrieved by the same, present appeal is filed.

2. Briefly, the case of the prosecution is that, the appellant is the wife of P.W.1. The deceased is the mother of P.W.1 and mother-in- law of the appellant. On 06.08.2010, it is alleged that in the evening around 5.00 p.m, the deceased namely Ramavva asked the appellant to arrange onions in a bag. Then the appellant quarreled with the deceased, pushed her down to the ground and tied petty coat thread/rope around her neck, throttling her in an attempt to kill the deceased. The deceased Ramavva shouted for help. Immediately, neighbor P.W.2 went to the house and she saw the appellant sitting on the deceased and pressing her neck with a petty coat thread/rope. P.W.2, then intervened and separated the deceased and the appellant.

3. P.W.1, who is the son of the deceased. Receiving information from P.W.2, P.W.1 went home and took his mother/deceased to Bharath Pawar hospital at Nizamabad. There, the hospital authorities refused to admit her in the hospital. The deceased went to the police station along with P.W.1 and filed complaint at 6.15 p.m. In the complaint, she narrated that she was pushed on to the ground, and the appellant tried to strangulate her by squeezing her neck with a petty coat rope/thread. The police examined the deceased and Ex.P7/complaint was drafted, and the deceased affixed her thumb impression. The police referred the deceased to the Government Hospital, Nizamabad. The deceased was treated for three days in the Government Hospital and as advised by the Doctors, the deceased was taken to Hyderabad for better treatment in Gandhi Hospital, but even before admitting her in the Gandhi hospital, the deceased died. From Gandhi Hospital, the dead body was taken to Nizamabad Government Hospital where the postmortem examination was conducted by P.W.6. P.W.6 found the following injuries: “External injuries:

1. Abrasions over neck.

2. Legature mark above the hyoid bone around the neck horizontal.

3. Tips of the upper limb fingers nail bed bluish discoloration Internal injuries:

1. Multiple peticheal hemorrhages present in the brain, blood clot present over right temporal region, right parietal region.

4. Police conducted inquest proceedings before body was sent for postmortem examination. Thereafter, charge sheet was filed, for the offence under Section 302 IPC. The opinion of the postmortem Doctor was that the death was due to asphyxia due to strangulation.

5. Learned Sessions Judge mainly relied on the evidence of P.W.2 and the complaint Ex.P7, which was given by the deceased herself in the police station to come to the conclusion that the act of the appellant in trying to strangulate her, resulted in the death of the deceased after five days of the incident i.e., 11.08.2010.

6. Sri N.Abhishek, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Ch.Siddaiah, learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the deceased was, in fact, treated in three different hospitals. According to P.W.1 and P.W.3 deceased was brought back to the house, three days after the incident. If at all she was brought back from the hospital, that would be after the deceased being treated. None of the Doctors treating the deceased were examined. No reasons are given as to why the deceased, though taken to Gandhi Hospital in Hyderabad, was again taken back to the Nizamabad for the purpose of postmortem examination. A false case is filed against the appellant.

7. Sri M.Vivekananda Reddy, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that, though the death cannot be directly related to the alleged incident on 06.08.2010, however, the appellant has attacked her mother-in-law, i.e., the deceased and tried to strangulate her with petty coat rope/thread, which act