NIMMARABOINA GANGAIAH Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides.

(2.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 1. 12. 2006 passed by the ii Additional Sessions Judge, Suryapet, nalgonda District in Sessions Case No. 600 of 2005, whereby and whereunder the first appellant (accused No. 1) was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence under section 498-A, IPC; and further sentenced to undergo 'life imprisonment' and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence under Section 302 ipc; the second appellant (accused No. 2)was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 324 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence under Section 498-A, ipc; and further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence under section 324 IPC; the appellants 3 and 4 (accused 3 and 4) were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498-A, ipc and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year each and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month each. Challenging the said order of conviction and sentences, accused 1 to 4 have preferred the present appeal.

(3.) THE brief facts necessary for considering the appeal, according to the prosecution, may be stated as follows: the deceased Nimmaraboina Kalamma was the daughter of PWs. 1 and 2. She was given in marriage to accused No. 1, who is the son of accused 2 and 3. The marriage was performed in the year 2005. At the time of marriage, PWs. 1 and 2 gave an amount of Rs. 80,000/- as dowry to accused no. 1. However, since one month after the marriage, the appellants (accused 1 to 4)started demanding additional dowry of an amount of Rs. 50,000/- for the purpose of purchasing an auto for accused No. 1. Whenever PW1, the father of the deceased, was informed by the deceased about the harassment meted out to her by the accused, he used to go to the house of accused, which is situate in a nearby village and try to convince accused No. 1 and his parents. Ultimately, on 17. 9. 2005 in the afternoon, some people from the village of the accused came and informed PW1 that the deceased died at the matrimonial home. PWs. 1 and 2, their close relatives along with some others went to the house of accused No. 1 and found the doors of the house of accused No. 1 were locked. Thereafter, they went to the house of accused 2 and 3 and there they found the body of the deceased Kalamma lying on the ground. They also noticed injuries on the neck of the deceased. PW4, second daughter of PWs. 1 and 2, was also given in marriage in the village of the accused and she informed PWs. 1 and 2 and the other relatives that all the accused killed the deceased Kalamma in the house of accused No. 1 and thereafter shifted the body of the deceased to the house of accused No. 2 and laid it on the ground. When PWs. 1 and 2 questioned as to the cause of death of the deceased, the accused beat the son of PW1 as well as one Vadde Nagaiah after throwing chilly-powder into their eyes. Subsequently, accused No. 2 also bite on the cheek of pw8 and caused a bleeding injury. On a report lodged by PW1 in Mothey police Station with PW18, the Sub Inspector of Police, a case in Crime No. 61 of 2005 came to be registered against the accused for the offences punishable under sections 498-A and 302 IPC. Initially, the investigation was conducted by PW18 and subsequently, it was taken over by PW19, circle Inspector of Police, Suryapet. In the course of investigation, inquest over the body of the deceased was held and thereafter, it was dispatched to the Government Area hospital, Suryapet for the purpose of conducting post-mortem examination. PW17, medical Officer in the said hospital, on the requisition of the Mandal Revenue Officer, mothey, conducted post-mortem examination over the body of deceased and issued ex. P11, post-mortem examination report, incorporating the injuries found by him on the body of the deceased and expressing his opinion that the cause of death of the deceased was due to asphyxia by throttling and smothering. After completing the investigation, the Inspector of Police filed a charge-sheet against the accused. Before the learned Additional Sessions judge, the prosecution, in order to establish the guilt of the accused, examined PWs. 1 to 19, marked Exs. P1 to P13 and MO1. The accused examined DWs. 1 and 2 on their behalf and marked Exs. D1 to D3. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, on a consideration of the entire evidence on record, convicted the accused and sentenced them to punishment, as mentioned above.