K. SUNITHA Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Sections 437 and 439 of Cr.P.C by Accused Nos. 1 and 2 in Crime No. 442 of 2020 on the file of Palamaner Urban Police Station, Chittoor district, to release these petitioners on bail, in the above crime registered for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'I.P.C), as they are in judicial custody since 23.07.2020.

(2.) The case of prosecution is that, on the intervening night of 21/22.07.2020 murder of the deceased - Gopinath Reddy was committed by Accused Nos. 1 and 2, who are none other than the wife and mother-in-law of the deceased - Gopinath Reddy. It is a case that the deceased - Gopinath Reddy wanted to purchase a tractor and asked his wife Accused No.1 to release her pledged gold jewels from the bank for purchasing tractor, for which she refused. In this connection, there was quarrel between them in which the deceased - Gopinath Reddy beat his wife i.e. Accused No. 1. Further, Accused No.1 approached her mother -Accused No.2 and informed about the same. Thereupon, both the petitioners went to the house of deceased- Gopinath Reddy where Accused No.1 beat her husband with pestle on his head and Accused No.2 beat him with cricket bat on his private parts, deceased - Gopinath Reddy received severe bleeding injuries and died on the spot. The defacto complainant, who is the sister of the deceased - Gopinath Reddy filed a written complaint and on the basis of complaint, a case in Crime No.442 of 2020 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302 r/w 34 I.P.C and issued F.I.R.

(3.) The main contention of the petitioners is that, they did commit no offence and they are none other than wife and mother-in-law of the deceased - Gopinath Reddy and that there is no iota of truth in the allegations. It is further contended that the contents of the report are sufficient to conclude that there were no subsisting conjugal relationship between the deceased - Gopinath Reddy and his wife (first petitioner) and they are living separately in two different houses at a distant place and the petitioners are implicated falsely. It is also contended that the first petitioner and the deceased - Gopinath Reddy are not in visiting terms thereby, question of committing murder of the deceased - Gopinath Reddy does not arise and requested to enlarge this petitioners on bail, as major part of investigation is completed.