VATTIKUTI SURYA SANKARARAO Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri D.Kasim Saheb, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the appellant and Sri A.Sai Rohith, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State.

(2.) The appeal is preferred challenging the judgment dtd. 18/2/2020 in Sessions Case No.226 of 2019 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, East Godavari at Rajamahendravaram. The appellant was convicted for the offence under Sec. 304-B of IPC and Ss. 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short the D.P.Act). The appellant was sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of ten (10) years and to pay fine of Rs.500.00 (Rupees Five Hundred Only), in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two (02) months for the offence under Sec. 304-B of IPC: the appellant is also sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of five (05) years and to pay fine of Rs.15,000.00(Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only), in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three (03) months for the offence under Sec. 3 of the D.P.Act: the appellant was also sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one (01) year and to pay fine of Rs.200.00 (Rupees Two Hundred Only) in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two (02) months for the offence under Sec. 4 of the D.P.Act.

(3.) The case of the prosecution is that the marriage of the appellant and Manikyamba @ Devi (hereinafter referred to as deceased) the second daughter of P.W.1 was performed on 17/5/2017 at Vella Village. The parents of the deceased presented Rs.2,00,000.00 (Rupees Two Lakhs Only), gold and a house portion etc., towards dowry to the appellant. The deceased joined the appellant at Vella Village. They lead marital life for some time at Vella Village. Later, the appellant started harassing the deceased demanding additional dowry. The appellant used to beat the deceased to bring additional dowry. It was informed to the parents of the deceased. The matter was placed before the elders. The elders advised the deceased and the appellant to start a family at Ramachandrapuram. Therefore, the appellant and deceased started living at Ramachandrapuram in the house of P.W.3. The appellant did not change his conduct. The appellant continued harassment demanding for additional dowry and sell away the house gifted to the deceased. Soon after, one day P.W.1 was informed by brother of the appellant that deceased was admitted in the hospital. Immediately, P.W.1, P.W.2 i.e., sister of the deceased went to the hospital at Ramachandrapuram. They were informed that the deceased was brought dead.