UKKAJIGARI VANAJA Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE sole accused in S. C. No. 36 of 2003 on the file of the Court of Sessions Judge, nizamabad, is the appellant. She was accused of committing the murder of a child Shivaji of eleven months age, by throttling its neck. The trail Court found the appellant, guilty of the offence under Section 302 as well as Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. Forthe offence under Section 302, the appellant was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and was fined Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment forone month. She was also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500, in default to undergo simple imprisonment of one month for the offence under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) THE prosecution alleged as under: the appellant is the wife of P. W. 6. P. W. 1 is the elder brother of P. W. 6 and P. W. 2 is the wife of P. W. 1. Both the brothers were living jointly. The marriage of accused with P. W. 6 took place eight months prior to the date of incident. P. Ws. 1 and 2 got two children earlier, but both of them died. The deceased was their third child. P. W. 3, the sister of p. Ws. 1 and 6, was living in the same house after deserting her husband. The deceased child woke up at 4 a. m. on the date of incident i. e. , 21 -11 -2002 and started crying. P. Ws. 1, 2,3,6 and accused have woken up, on hearing the cries of the child. The accused has taken the child from P. W. 2 by instructing her to prepare milk and went to the backyard of the house, along with the child. After ten minutes, she came alone and when she did not give any answer as to the whereabouts of the child, the witnesses referred to above have started searching and found the child in an old well, in the backyard of the house. The motive attributed to the accused is that if the deceased is killed, the entire property of P. W. 1 would also accrue to her husband, since P. W. 2 had undergone family planning operation after the birth of the deceased.

(3.) P. W. 1 submitted a complaint, marked as Ex. P-1, in the nearby Police Station at about 9 a. m. and the crime was registered. The inquest was conducted on the dead body of the deceased and this was followed by postmortem by P. W. 5. The postmortem report, marked as Ex. P-4, discloses that the death occurred on account of throttling of neck. Further investigation was undertaken and charge-sheet was filed against the appellant, accusing her that she has committed the offence of murder and resorted to removal of evidence, to conceal her guilt.