SIRISALA MAHALAXMI ALIAS MAHALAXMI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Smt. S. Hemalatha, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant-sole accused and the learned additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State.

(2.) THIS criminal appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'cr. PC. ') is directed against the judgment, dated 21. 11. 2006, in Sessions case No. 380 of 2006, passed by the VII additional Sessions Judge, Kakinada, East godavari District in convicting the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'ipc') and sentencing him to undergo 'rigorous imprisonment for life' and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- (Rupees five hundred only), in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a further period of three months.

(3.) THE case of prosecution, in brief, is that the appellant is the husband and father of Sirisala Bhushanam and kanchipetta Bhulakshmi (hereinafter referred to as 'deceased 1 and 2'), respectively. Actually, it appears that deceased No. l was originally married to some other person quite sometime back, later on she developed intimacy with the appellant, started living with him at subbayyammapeta Vilalge of Gandepalli mandal. During the association of deceased no. l with the appellant, undisputedly she begot 4 children, out of which deceased no. 2 is the only daughter. It is also an undisputed fact that deceased No. 2 was married to someone and was deserted and therefore, she came back to her parents i. e. , the appellant and deceased No. l, and started living with them. The appellant had an own house at some other place at subbayyammapeta. Some repair works were going on to the said house and therefore, they had been living in a hut raised in the land belonging to Tetala Dorayya Reddy (PW6), which is slightly away from the village. On 25. 3. 2006 the appellant allegedly went to the hut and requested deceased no. l to give a sum of about Rs. 500/- to pay wages to the coolies, who were constructing his own house. It is the allegation that both the deceased refused to give the money and abused the appellant. The appellant felt insulted and consequently, on the same day at about 8 p. m. , during night he went to the hut, where both the deceased were sleeping. The appellant picked up a knife, which was available in the eves of the hut, hacked both the deceased indiscriminately causing their instantaneous death. Afterwards, the appellant left the hut. Again on 26. 3. 2006 in the morning the appellant went to the hut, saw the dead bodies of his wife and daughter, and returned to the village and informed the villagers and his son Sirisala appala Raju (PW3), that someone had killed deceased 1 and 2. On 13. 4. 2006 at about p. m. , the appellant approached satyavolu Satyanarayana Murthy, Panchayat secretary, Subbayyammapeta Village (PW11)and confessed about committal of the offence and his statement was reduced into writing and the report given by PW11 to the circle Inspector of Police, Jaggampet, was marked as Ex. PS. Subsequently, PW11 took the appellant to the police station. On the same day at about 11 a. m. , Yanala satyanarayana (PW1), who is the younger brother of deceased No. l, gave a report (Ex. P15) to the Station House Officer, gandepalli, pursuant to which, a case in crime No. 26 of 2006 for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. , was registered against the appellant and issued fir. , Ex. P16. The Investigating Officer took up investigation and after completing all the formalities charge-sheet had been filed.