In cases of circumstantial evidence, if the prosecution establishes a complete chain of evidence, including motive and medical causation, the burden shifts to the accused under Section 106 of the Evidence Act to explain a death occurring in their exclusive presence; failure to do so warrants a conviction for murder.

This Court delivered the following:

JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice K. Lakshman)

Heard Mr. P. Vamsheedhar Reddy, learned counsel representing Mr. Medikonda Kondal Rao, learned counsel for the appellant - accused and Dr. S. Prashanth, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent.

2. This appeal is filed challenging the judgment dated 22.03.2017 in S.C. No.244 of 2012 passed by learned VIII Additional Sessions Judge at Miryalguda.

3. Vide the aforesaid judgment, learned trial Court convicted the appellant - accused for the offence under Section - 302 of IPC and accordingly sentenced them to undergo life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.1,000 (Rupees One Thousand Only) and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three (03) months and acquitted for the offence under Section - 498A of IPC.

4. The case of the prosecution is as follows:

i) PW.1 and LW.1 performed marriage of Gunja Nagamani, hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’, with the accused as per customs prevailing in their caste. After the marriage, they lived happily for some time. During their wedlock, they were blessed with two sons.

ii) For the past 1½ years from the date of incident (i.e., 29.11.2011), the accused addicted to alcohol and started to suspect the deceased that she developed illicit intimacy with other male at Huzurnagar. Keeping such suspicion in mind, the accused subjected the deceased to cruelty, both physically and mentally.

iii) About 20 days prior to the incident, the accused subjected the deceased to cruelty and beat her indiscriminately. The same was informed to her father (LW.1), who in turn came and took her and her children to his house at Damaracherla and provided treatment to the deceased. Subsequently, the accused went to his in-laws house and promised that he would take-care them well. On that, LW.1 provided house of LW.7 at Damaracherla to the accused on rent. Since then, the accused along with deceased and their two sons is residing in the said house and the accused attending mason work.

iv) Thereafter, the accused again started subjecting the deceased to cruelty suspecting her fidelity. Since the accused obtained loans from known persons for his personal and domestic expenses, he insisted the deceased to attend coolie work to discharge such loan amount, but the deceased refused to do. Therefore, the accused developed grudge over the deceased and ultimately decided to kill her.

v) On 28.11.2011 night the accused along with deceased and children asleep in their rented house. In between 23.00 and 24.00 hours, while the deceased was in slumber, the accused throttled the deceased and murdered her. Later he had taken away gold ear studs from the person of deceased with intent to sell them for his personal expenses and fled away from the house, while escaping screws of ear studs fell down somewhere. Thus, the accused committed the offences under Sections - 498A and 302 of IPC.

vi) On receipt of report (Ex.P8) from the father of the deceased (LW.1), PW.11 - Sub-Inspector of Police, Wadapally Police Station registered a case in Crime No.135 of 2011 on 29.11.2011 for the aforesaid offences and issued Ex.P6 - FIR.

vii) Thereafter, on receipt of requisition from PW.11, PW.12 - the Tahsildar took steps conducting inquest over the dead body of the deceased vide Ex.P7 - inquest in the presence of PW.8 and LW.11. On completion of investigation, PW.13 - Inspector of Police filed a charge sheet against the appellant herein. T