THOKALA RAMULU Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused has preferred this appeal against the conviction and sentence of imprisonment for life and imposition of fine of Rs. 300/-, in default Simple Imprisonment for one month for the offence under Section 302 IPC and also conviction and sentence to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for one year and imposition of fine of Rs. 300/- in default Simple Imprisonment for one month for the offence under Section 498-A IPC awarded by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Warangal in S.C.No. 602 of 2000.

(2.) The incident which gives raise to the present criminal appeal happened on 10-3-2000 at about 8.00 p.m. The accused beat his wife T. Lachamma, who was married about 30 years ago blessed with three sons and one daughter. After abusing her in filthy language, he pressed on her throat with leg and hands in fully drunken condition, which led to the death of Lachamma on 11 -3-2000. On the strength of a report given by P.W.1 Cr.No. 20 of 2000 under Section 302 and 498-A IPC was registered by P.W.11. Thereafter, P.W.12 proceeded to the scene of offence after recording the statement of P.W. 1 on 11 -3-2000. He conducted scene of offence panchanama and also prepared Ex.P-2 inquest panchanama and sent the body to post-mortem examination. P.W.10 conducted autopsy over the dead body and opined that the deceased was already malnourished, emaciated, dehydrated state and injury over chest and traumatic incident and prolonged starvation precipitated her ill- health leading to peripheral shock, coma and death. P.W.13 another Circle Inspector arrested the accused on 10-4-2000 and laid charge-sheet. The accused has pleaded not guilty for offenses under Sections 302 and 498-A IPC. The prosecution in all examined 13 witness. Ex.P-1 is the complaint, Ex.P-2 is the inquest panchanama, Ex.P-3 is the scene of offence panchanama, Ex.P-5 is the postmortem certificate and Ex.P-6 is the first information report. The prosecution has mainly relied on the evidence of P.W.2 being the son and P.W.3 being the daughter-in-law of the deceased. The prosecution has also placed extra judicial confession said to have been made by P.W.5 to P.W.4 who has been brought by himfor treatment of thedeceased. It has also placed medical evidence opining that the deceased died due to malnutrition, emaciated, dehydrated state and prolonged starvation precipitated her ill-health leading to peripheral shock, coma and death. After appraisal of the entire evidence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has recorded a finding of guilt against the accused for the offence under Sections 302 and 498-A IPC and awarded sentences referred to above. Aggrieved by the same, the accused has preferred this appeal through jail. The accused is defended by the legal aid counsel.

(3.) It is mainly contended by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that the evidence of P.Ws.2,3,5 and 7 are interested. It is also contended that accused was in a drunken position and not in a position and capable of knowing of his acts and he is entitled to benefit under Section 85 IPC. It is further contended that the accused has no intention to kiil her and at best the offence may fall under Section 304 Part-ll IPC. He has placed reliance on the doctor's evidence.