JUDGMENT:

1. This appeal is filed by the appellant/accused, questioning the conviction and sentence recorded by the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District, in S.C.No.576 of 2007, dated 08.11.2011, for the offence under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced him to undergo one year Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, while acquitting the accused for the offence under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased was married to the appellant/accused herein. At the time of marriage dowry was given. They lived happily for two years and thereafter the accused started beating her constantly by coming home drunk. Panchayat was also held and money was given to the accused. On the date of the incident, the accused went home drunk and beat his wife. Unable to bear the beating, she took Kerosene and poured on to herself. Then the accused handed over match box stating that if she dies, he would marry someone else. She lit fire to herself. Immediately, the accused covered her with a blanket and put off the flames and has taken her to the Hospital. There, the Sub-Inspector of Police recorded her statement which is registered as FIR. A requisition was given to the Magistrate for the purpose of recording Dying Declaration. The Dying Declaration was recorded which is Ex.P4.

4. The learned Sessions Judge framed charge under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code. However, the learned Sessions Judge having examined PWs.1 to 13 and marking Exs.P1 to P8 on behalf of prosecution found that the evidence of harassment was consistent, however, the allegation of demand of dowry consequently resulting in her death was not believed. Accordingly, learned Sessions Judge acquitted the accused for the offence under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to three years imprisonment under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code.

5. Learned Counsel for the appellant would submit that the trial Court having disbelieved the version of the prosecution regarding the offence being made out under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code, erred in convicting the appellant under Section

498-A of the Indian Penal Code. The definition of cruelty under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code is ill-treatment or any such wilful conduct which is of such nature likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health of the woman. The Court itself has not believed that the injuries were consequence of any harassment and accordingly held that no case under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code was made out.

6. To prove the cruelty the conduct should be of such a nature which is wilful or wanton. The difference between the spouses in the normal day-to-day life would not fall within the definition of cruelty.

7. He relied on the judgment of Honourable Supreme Court in Swamy Prahaladdas v. State of M.P and another1 wherein the Honourable Supreme Court was dealing with a situation where the accused asked the deceased to go and die. In such circumstances, the Honourable Supreme Court held that the words used in a casual manner asking the deceased to go and die would not attract the ingredients of Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

1 1995 Supp (3) Supreme Court Cases 438

8. Counsel also relied on the Judgment of this Court in C.Veerudu v. State of A.P.2 wherein this Court while dealing with the case under Section 306 and 498 A of the Indian Penal Code, held that mens rea was an essential requisite for constituting cruelty as defined under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code.

9. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the parents of the deceased who were examined, has specifically stated that the accused was harassing her continuously for money. In fact money was already given and Pa