SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 18039

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT: HYDERABAD


HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

AND

HON’BLE JUSTICE B.R. MADHUSUDHAN RAO


CRIMINAL APPEAL No.157 OF 2019


DATE: 08-06-2026


Between:

1. Begari Ravinder

2. Talari Kistaiah. .. Appellants - Accused Nos.1 & 2

Vs.

The State of Telangana, rep.by its

Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyd. .. Respondent - Complainant

This Court delivered the following:

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

Heard Mr. P. Prabhakar Reddy, learned counsel for appellants - accused Nos.1 & 2 and Mr. Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent.

2. This appeal is filed challenging the judgment dated 31.12.2018 in S.C. No.63 of 2017 passed by learned Principal Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy.

3. Vide the aforesaid judgment, the trial Court convicted the appellants - accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offences under Sections - 302 and 201 read with 34 of IPC, while acquitted accused Nos.3 and 4 and accordingly sentenced them to undergo life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred Only) and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six (06) months for the offence under Section - 302 read with 34 of IPC. They were further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three (03) years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred Only) and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three (03) months for the offence under Section - 201 read with 34 of IPC.

4. Though learned trial Court found accused Nos.1 and 2 guilty of the charge under Section - 109 of IPC, no punishment was imposed. It appears that learned trial Court must have wrongly found them guilty of the said offence and it must be against accused Nso.3 and 4.

5. The case of the prosecution is as under:

i) Accused No.1 and Swapna (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased No.1’), resident of Vallabh Nagar Colony, Narsampet of Warangal District, while studying Inter First Year at Ambedkar College, Bandlaguda, Hyderabad, both of them became friends. After first year Intermediate, deceased No.1 joined in Bible College, Bandlaguda and continued friendship with accused No.1. Accused No.1 visited the native place of deceased No.1 frequently and fell in love with her and the parents of deceased No.1 accepted to marry them and the marriage of deceased No.1 and accused No.1 was performed in Yadagirigutta in the presence of mother of the deceased No.1, but the parents of the accused did not accept their marriage.

ii) After the marriage, both resided in Shankarpally Village, Rangareddy District by doing labour work in a Dhaba Hotel. Due to financial problem, they left Shankarpally Village and came to the village of accused No.1 i.e., Charla Naganpally of Raikode Mandal. Since their marriage, both of them were quarreling with each other on various issues and his parents (accused Nos.3 and 4) were demanding additional dowry and harassing her mentally and physically by using filthy language. Accused No.1 beat his wife (deceased No.1) for not doing labour work. Deceased No.1 approached Village Sarpanch and elders, who counseled them so many times and did not change their attitude.

iii) Due to unbearable harassment, the same was informed to her parents. They came to Cherla Naganpally Village and took her to Raikode Police Station and gave a report to the Police, Raikode, who in turn registered a case in Crime No.4 of 2013 for the offence under Section - 498A of IPC and the same is pending vide C.C. No.39 of 2013. Then, deceased No.1 went to her parents house at Narsampet of Warangal District while she was pregnant. Accused No.1 felt that due to his wife, he and his parents were always going to the Court and facing lot of problems and, therefore, accused No.1 and his brother-in-law (accused No.2), resident of Neredugunta Village of Andhole Mandal, hatched a plan to eliminate the wife of accused No.1.

iv) Accused No.1 visited Narsampet to meet his wife and mother-in-law and promised them that he would look after her and not to harass for dowry. They both agreed and accused No.1 brought his wife and his daughter - Aishwarya, aged about 2 years (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased No.2’), to Charla Naganpally and lived together in their house. On 08.05.2015 at Lok Adalat, both went to the Court and signed on

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top