M YADAIAH Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal is filed against the Judgment of conviction and sentence dt. 29-5-1992 passed by the II Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad in Sessions Case No. 104/89, convicting the appellant for an offence under Section 304-B of I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years.

(2.) The Prosecution case in brief may be summarised thus : The Accused-Appellant M. Yadaiah is the husband of the deceased Andalu, and they .. .. .. were married in the year 1986. A-2 is the mother of A-1, A-3 is the sister of A-1 and A-4 is the husband of A-3. The deceased Andalu died of drowning on 8-3-88 in Kartala Rajaiah well situated at Bandlaguda. According to the prosecution, all these four accused persons had subjected her to cruelty and harassment and ill-treated and tortured her to bring 1 1/2 tolas of gold from her parents by way of dowry; the 1st accused was also threatening her that he would go for the second marriage. For sometime after the marriage the accused and the deceased lived a happy and peaceful life, but thereafter all the four accused persons started il-treating and harassing the deceased demanding dowry as aforesaid. On the date of occurrence in the morning hours, the 1st accused reached the house of PW-1, the brother of the deceased and told him that his wife i.e. the deceased was missing from the house. Then a search was made in this regard. PW-2 is the step brother of the deceased, PW-3 is the step-mother of the deceased and PW-10 is the father of the deceased. They all went to search the deceased near about the wells in the Bandlaguda locality and when the search was made in Kartala Rajaiah well the deceased was found drowned in that well. The dead body was removed from the said well next day at 2 p.m. A police report was lodged in the Chandrayangutta Police Station. The police started investigation in the case after registering a case as Cr. No. 36/88 under Section 498-A I.P.C. and 302 I.P.C. r/w. Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. Subsequently the case was altered to Section 304-B I.P.C. r/w. Section 3 and 4 Dowry Prohibition Act. During the course of investigation the statements of the parents and the brothers of the deceased were recorded. The Investigating Officer reached the scene of occurrence and prepared panchanama in the presence of mediators. The Mandal Revenue Officer conducted the inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of mediators and thereafter the dead body was sent for post-mortem examination. Autopsy was conducted by Dr. K. Raj Gopal Reddy. The accused were arrested and were remanded to judicial custody and after completing the investigation in the case chargesheet was filed in the Court.

(3.) The charges for the offence under Section 304-B of I.P.C. were framed against all the four accused. They pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined 11 witnesses and marked 12 exhibits. When examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. all the accused denied their guilt and stated that the deceased was not mentally sound at the time of her death. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge acquitted A-2 to A-4 of the charges levelled against them, but convicted A-1, the husband of the deceased Andalu and sentenced him as aforesaid.