MAREPPAGARI KUPPAIAH Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant was tried in S.C.No.46 of 2008 on the file of the District and Sessions Judge, Chittoor for the offence punishable under Sec.302 I.P.C. for having caused the death of C.Mangamma (for short the deceased) in her house at Kadathatlapalli S.C. Colony, Baireddipalle Mandal on the intervening night of 21/22.03.2007 by strangulating her. Through its Judgment dt. 25.01.2010, the trial Court found the accused guilty and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.500/ -, in default to under go simple imprisonment for six months.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under: After the death of her husband, the deceased started living at Kadathatlapalli village. The accused developed illicit intimacy with her and continued it for about five years, prior to the incident. On 21.12.2007, the deceased was sleeping in her house along with her maternal aunt Venkatamma -PW.3. The accused, who was frequently visiting the deceased, came there, and on seeing him, PW.3 came out of the room and slept in the veranda. At about 11.00 p.m., in the night the accused killed the deceased and went out of the room. T. Muni Ratnam is the cousin brother of the deceased and he is a resident of the same village. He filed the complaint with Baireddipalli Police Station at 5.00 p.m. on 22.12.2007 stating that on the same day morning at about 9.30 a.m. his villagers Manohar and Babu (not examined as witnesses) came and informed him that the deceased was found lying dead in her house. He further stated that since the deceased was having illicit intimacy with the accused and also one Krishnappa, they might have killed his sister.

(3.) COGNIZANCE was taken and the case was registered as S.C.No.46 of 2008 by the District and Sessions Judge, Chittoor. Charge under Sections 302 IPC was framed against the accused, and on his pleading not guilty, the trial was taken up. On behalf of the prosecution PWs.1 to 9 were examined, Exs.P.1 to P.7 were filed, and M.Os.1 to 7 were taken on record. The accused denied the evidence on record and contended that he was falsely implicated. In his defence, Exs.D1 to D.7 were filed.