LexVANGA SRINIWAS versus PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF A.P.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A V ANGA SRINIWAS ~- v. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF A.P. SEPTEMBER 14, 2007 B (CJ(. THAKKERANDP.SATHASIVAM,JJ.) Penal Code, 1860-ss. 3048 and 20l~Strangulation of wife by J.., husband-Alteration of charges from s. 302 toss. 3048 and 201-Acquittal c by trial court-High Court convicting accused under s. 302 and imposing life imprisonment-Held: Not justified-Evidence of panchas, medical evidence and the fact that accused was alone in the company of deceased, it is clear that deceased died due to strangulation-Based on materials collected with regard to dowry demand, suspicion, harassment and torture by accused and medical evidence as to the cause of death, investigating agency altered the D offence from s. 302 to 3048 and 201-High Court did not take note of the same-In view of altered charges, accused convicted under s. 3048 and sentenced to 7 years rigorous imprisonment. According to the prosecution case, appellant murdered his wife-VV by strangulation and hanged the dead body to the ceiling fan with the intention E to screen the offence. One year prior to the incident appellant was married to VV. Parents of the deceased-PW-I and PW-2 stated that the accused tortured and harassed the deceased for dowry. The residents of the village also deposed that appellant and VV used to quarrel regarding dowry. Father of the deceased- PW I lodged FIR Investigation was carried out Doctor conducted post-mortem F and opined that he could not decide preliminarily that death was suicidal or .l homicidal. Charge sheet was filed. Thereafter, investigating agency based on ' the materials with regard to demand of dowry, suspicion, harassment and torture by the accused and the medical evidence as to the cause of death altered the charges from section 302 to section 304B and section 201. Sessions Judge relying on the finding of the doctor and that the prosecution failed to establish G its case, acquitted the appellant-accused for the offence under sections 302, 201 or 3048 IPC. High Court finding that the prosecution has established the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, convicted the accused for offence under section 302 and imposed life imprisonment. Hence the present .. ,.l appeal H 1028 V ANGA SRINIWAS v. PUB. PROSE. HIGH COURT OF A.P. 1029 ·>- During pendency of appeal, appellant filed application for permission to A file additional documents-Annexure Al-copy of alteration of section of law from s. 302 to s. 304B and s. 201 IPC filed by the Police Inspector before trial court and Annexure Al-copy of charge sheet filed by Sub Divisional Police Officer. Partly allowing the appeal, the Court B HELD: 1. The conviction and sentence imposed by the High Court is modified and the appellant/accused is convicted under section 304 B IPC and a sentence of seven years rigorous imprisonment is imposed to meet the ends of justice. (Para 16) (1037-F, G] c 2.1. The statement of prosecution witnesses 3, 4 and 6 cannot be lightly ignored when admittedly all of them are residents of the same village particularly residing in and around the house of accused. Though no specific reference was made to dowry demand in the complaint, if the entire evidence of PWs 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 coupled with other circumstances is considered the D accused harassed the deceased and threatened her on many occasions for not 1 fulfilling his demand of dowry. No doubt, he not only threatened her but also doubted her fidelity and was not able to bear with her when she interacted with others. It is not in dispute that at the time of occurrence, the deceased and the accused alone were inside the house. If it is a mere case of suicide, on seeing the same he could have raised an alarm or even prevented her, E instead he ran away from the scene ofoccurrence. (Para 11) (1034-D, E, Fl 2.2. Both PWs 8 and 9-attestors of inquest report expressed that the deceased had not committed suicide but she was throttled and was hanged to the fan. They also observed that the feet of the dead body was touching the cot F beneath and the saree noose was loose. It is also seen that during the inquest, the panchas also opined that the accused used to suspect the fidelity of the deceased and he used to beat her. PW 11 - Mandal Revenue Officer deposed that the inquest was held in his presence and found marks around the neck and ear. [Para 12) [1034-G, H; 1035-A, BJ G 2.3. Doctor who conducted post-mortem on the body of
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.