MODEPALLI BASAVAIAH Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is from the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Ongole in Sessions Case No. 87 of 1991 convicting the sole accused, appellant herein, for an offence under Sec. 302, I.P.C. and sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment for life, and also for an offence under Sec. 201, I.P.C. for which a sentence of three years rigorous imprisonment was awarded, with a direction that both the sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) In brief, the prosecution case is that the deceased-Modepalli Sundaramma, was married to the accused, eight years prior to the date of the incident i.e., 11.9.1990 and a son and daughter were born to them. The accused got himself separated from his father and brother about one year prior to the occurrence, and in the partition, his share of immovable property came to Ac. 2-00 cents of land. He was living in a hut in a colony, adjacent to the village, Kamepalli, with his wife and children. The parents of the deceased, P.Ws. 1 and 2 are natives of Minnekallu. The Police Station having jurisdiction over these areas is in Santhamagulur which is in between the two villages, at a distance of 2 kilometres. The accused was addicted to vices and used to come home drunk and beat his wife. One month prior to the incident, he sold away Ac. 0-60 cents of his land about which his wife had questioned and a quarrel ensued. A week prior to the death of the deceased, her mother, P.W. 2 visited the house when she was told about the state of affairs of the family and the deceased wept before her. P.W. 2 consoled her to. adjust herself. She brought along with her the two children of the deceased to her house. On the intervening night of 11/12.9.1990, the accused went to his parents house and informed his mother, P.W. 6 that his wife was found dead in the verandah of the house. P.W. 7, a villager and another person, were sent by the accused to Minnekallu to inform P.Ws. 1 and 2 that the deceased had committed suicide by hanging herself. P.W. 7 informed the same to P.Ws. 1 and 2 at about 6.00 a.m. on 12.9.1990, who reached the village along with their grand-children. The dead body of the deceased was found in the house; blood was noticed oozing from the left ring finger, and there was an injury on the right flank and contusion on the neck underneath the rightlaw. Suspecting that his daughter was murdered, P.W. 1 got a complaint (Ex. P-I) drafted by one of the persons that gathered at the scene and presented the same to P.W. 13, Sub-Inspector of Police at Santhamagular Police Station. The complaint was registered by the Sub-Inspector (P.W. 13) as Crime No. 70/90; Ex. P-14 is the F.I.R. The Inspector of Police, P.W. 12 on receiving the--information about the death of the deceased-Modepalli Sundaramma, in suspicious circumstances, took up the investigation. He inspected the scene and prepared an observation report, Ex. P-9 in the presence of the mediators. He also prepared a rough sketch of the scene, Ex. P -13. He also held inquest over the dead body. Ex. P-10 is the inquest report. In the house, he recovered a human tooth, which was seized under the cover of the observation report, Ex. P-9. P.W. 9, Woman Civil Assistant Surgeon, Government Hospital, Narasaraopet, conducted post-mortem examination on the body of the deceased on 13.9.1990 at 11.30 a.m. and she found on the body, the following four external injuries:

(3.) At the trial, P.Ws. 3 to 6 did not support the case of the prosecution. The prosecution intended through P.W. 3 to establish that he had seen the accused beating his wife and when the latter fell down unconscious, the accused hanged her body with a saree to the beam of the house. P.Ws. 4 and e 5, the immediate neighbours of the locality, also t were sought to be examined to prove that immediately after the occurrence, they came to know of the incident. P.W. 6 is the mother of the accused. All of them turned hostile. The plea of the accused was one of denial. The learned Sessions Judge, on the basis of circumstantial evidence, convicted and sentenced him for the offences under Sec. 302 and 201, I.P.C., as already stated supra.