VUNGARALA YEDUKONDALU Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The sole accused Yedukondalu in Sessions case No. 61 of 1986 is the appellant before us. He was charged and tried under S. 302, I.P.C. for having caused the death of Voleti Samrajyam by pouring Kerosene and setting fire to her clothes. He was found guilty of the charge and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life.

(2.) The case of the Prosecution is that the deceased Voleti Samrajyam is a native of Bapatla. She married her maternal uncle Voleti Venkateswara Rao. They had three female children. Venkateswara Rao died some time in the year 1984. After the death of Venkateswara Rao, the deceased was making her living by selling some groundnuts near Revathi Talkies at Masulipatnam. There she developed illicit intimacy with the accused Yedukondalu and they were living like husband and wife. The deceased and the accused used to quarrel often. On 31-1-1986 also the deceased and the accused had quarrel and in the evening at about 5 p.m. it is said that the appellant poured kerosene on the deceased and set fire to her clothes at her house. The deceased ran out of the house. Then she was taken to the Hospital by P.W. 2 Gadda Koteswaramma and one Jyothi. P.W. 4, the Deputy Civil Surgeon, Government Head Quarters Hospital, Masulipatnam examined the deceased and found burns all over the body. He issued the wound certificate. He gave the necessary treatment. He made entries in the accident register and sent Ex. P. 3 intimation to the Police and on receiving the same the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police, P.W. 8 came to the Hospital and recorded the statement of the deceased Ex. P-5 at 7.40 p.m. In the meantime, the III Additional Munsif Magistrate, Masulipatnam also reached the Hospital. He recorded the statement of the deceased at 7.45 p.m. Ex. P. 6. Later, at 8.30 p.m. P.W. 11 the Sub Inspector of Police recorded another statement of the deceased Ex. P. 14. In all the three statements the deceased stated that the appellant poured Kerosene and set fire to her clothes. The deceased died at 8.35 p.m. on 1-2-1986. After receiving the death intimation, the Section was altered to S. 302, I.P.C. under Ex. P-16. The Inspector of Police P.W. 12 took up the investigation on 2-2-1986. He went to the Hospital and examined P.Ws. 1 and 2. He conducted the inquest over the dead body of the deceased. The inquest report is Ex. P-13. He sent the dead body for autopsy. P.W. 5 the Civil Assistant Surgeon Bandar conducted the post mortem and issued the post mortem certificate Ex. P-9. He opined that the death was due to burn injuries. The appellant was arrested on 6-2-1986 at his house at about 8 a.m. by P.W. 12. As P.W. 12 found burns on the accused, he sent him to the Doctor for examination. Ex. P-10 is the wound certificate. P.W. 6 the Civil Assistant Surgeon of Government Hospital, Bandar examined the appellant. He found him to be having 30% burns. The Doctor opined that the injuries are grievous in nature. The appellant got treated for about a month for his burn injuries. The appellant was treated for 6 weeks in the Hospital. After completing the investigation, the Inspector of Police filed charge-sheet on 29-4-1986. The Prosecution examined 14 witnesses in all and marked Exs. P-1 to P-16 and M.Os. 1 to 8. The appellant had not examined any witnesses or marked any documents.

(3.) When examined under S. 313, Cr.P.C. the appellant stated that the deceased was a quarrelsome lady, that on 31-1-1986, she quarreled for some money, that he gave her Rs. 10.00, she was not satisfied, that he slept in the house till 5 p.m. and he woke up on hearing some cries, then he saw the deceased in flames. He tried to rescue her and in that process he received the burnt injuries and by the time he came our after tying a lungi, the deceased was taken to the Hospital by two ladies, that he also went to the Hospital in another Rickshaw. Soon he came to know that he was implicated in the case and out of fear, he went away.