STATE OF A P Vs. PATNAM ANANDAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent herein was put up for trial before the Sessions Judge, Rangareddy District, Hyderabad in Sessions Case No. 99/1993 charged of the offence under Section 302, IPC.

(2.) It is the case of the prosecution that some time between 4.00 p. m. and 7.00 p. m. on 7-11-1992 the respondent killed his wife in the agricultural field belonging to him. It is undisputed that there is no eye-witness of the crime and the case rests on circumstantial evidence. The trial Court accepted the evidence adduced by the prosecution and convicted the respondent of the offence under Section 302, IPC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life, but acquitted him of the charge under Section 498A, IPC by his judgment and order of 6th February, 1995. The respondent preferred an appeal before the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad being Criminal Appeal No. 169/1995. The High Court by its impugned judgment and order allowed his appeal and acquitted him. The order of acquittal passed by the High Court has been challenged before us by the State of Andhra Pradesh.

(3.) The facts of the case insofar as they are relevant for the disposal of this appeal may be succinctly stated. According to the prosecution, the respondent was married to the deceased Shankaramma about six months before the occurrence. The relationship between the respondent and his wife was not cordial on account of the fact that the deceased-wife was not an educated woman. The case of the prosecution is that the respondent used to ill-treat his wife. PW-3 mother of the deceased claims to have come to the village where the deceased was residing with her husband with a view to take her to her house for Jatara (village fair) but respondent and his parents did not send the deceased with her on the pretext that some agricultural work has to be attended to and pesticides had to be sprayed in the fields. She was with them till about 4.00 p.m. on that day and accompanied them to their field. Thereafter, she left for Marpally village where another daughter of hers was residing. Next morning when she was preparing to go back to her village, she came to learn at the bus stand that her daughter had died. On receiving the message, she immediately came to the place of occurrence and found the dead body of the deceased in the field of the accused with injuries on her chest and face. The case of the prosecution is that at about 7.00 p.m. the father of the accused PW-1 reported to the Sarpanch of the village PW-11 that he had come to know that the deceased had consumed poison and when he met his son (respondent herein) some time later he informed him that his wife had consumed poison and died. On such report being made the Sarpanch informed the police on telephone about the occurrence. Next morning at 6.30 a. m. the police officer PW-13 came to the place of occurrence and started investigation. From the first information report, it appears that the village where the occurrence took place is at a distance of 4 kms. from the police station. The first information report was lodged by the Sarpanch PW-11 at 6.30 a.m. on 8-11-1992. The report is Exhibit P-6 in which he stated that PW-1 and his elder son had come to him and reported to him that the deceased had gone with the respondent to his field between 11.00 and 12.00 hrs. and that in the evening his daughter-in-law died in the field after consuming pesticide. He further stated in the report that at 7.00 p. m. he informed the police at Peddamual police station. He also received information from the villagers that the respondent and the deceased had disputes and the villagers suspected that the respondent may have killed her. It is, therefore, apparent that the first information report is by a person who is not an eye-witness and who lodged the report on the basis of what he came to learn at the place of occurrence. It appears that on the request of the Investigating Officer PW-10 prepared the inquest report Exh. P-2.