THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA And THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.206 OF 2007 13th October 2009 Between: V.Anil Kumar …APPELLANT AND State of A.P., rep.by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA And THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.206 OF 2007 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Kantha Rao) This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment, dated 30.11.2006, in S.C.No.213 of 2006 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Khammam, convicting and sentencing the appellant to undergo life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code {IPC} and to pay fine of Rs.200/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. Briefly stated the prosecution case is that 09.05.2005 at 12.30 P.M. the appellant came to the house of the deceased Vishnu Kumari arming with a knife and stabbed her on her chest, when she was taking food. On seeing the incident, PW2, who is none other than the wife of the appellant and the daughter of the deceased raised hue and cry. On hearing of the cries neighbours, some of them who were cited and examined as witnesses in this case, rushed to the spot and saw the deceased in a pool of blood and also the appellant running away from the scene of offence. They shifted the injured to Primary Health Centre, Velairpadu for treatment, where she succumbed to injuries. On the same day at 13.30 hours, M.Rama Krishna, PW1 who is none other than the brother of the deceased lodged a report with PW17, the S.I. of police, Velairpadu and on the strength of the said report a case in Cr.No.14/2005 under Section 302 I.P.C. came to be registered against the appellant. PW19, the Inspector of Police, conducted investigation and after completion of investigation, he filed charge sheet. In order to establish the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined PWs.1 to 20 and got marked Exs.P1 to P21 and Mos.1 to 3. The appellant did not choose to examine any witness nor did he mark any document on his behalf. The learned trial Court upon considering the entire material available on record convicted the appellant of the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him as mentioned above. Now, the point for consideration, in this appeal, is whether the order of conviction and sentence, passed by the trial Court, can be sustained or liable to be set aside? We have heard Smt.S.Hemalatha, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, as well as the learned Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondent-State. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the conviction was mainly based on the evidence of PW2, who is none other than the daughter of the deceased and wife of the appellant and it is not safe to sustain the said conviction recorded by the trial Court. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State submits that the evidence of PW2, who is none other than the wife of the appellant, is highly reliable, this apart, there is other evidence on record showing the involvement of the appellant in the commission of offence and the trial Court rightly convicted the appellant of the charge levelled against him. Hence, the conviction and the sentence passed by the trial Court need no interference in this appeal. Admittedly, the offence took place in the house of the deceased, when PW.2 and the appellant were present in the house. PW2 had categorically stated in her deposition before the trial Court that the appellant was habituated to drinking, one week prior to the date of incident, he came in a drunken state to the house and beat her, thereafter, she fell down and became unconscious. She further deposed that on the same day the deceased came to the house of the appellant and took her to her house at Budevipeta village. She further deposed that four days thereafter, the appellant came to the house of her mother (the deceased) and requested her mother to send PW2 along with him and picked up quarrel with her mother and on that, her mother informed the appellant that she was not willing to send PW2 with him. As regards the incident proper, PW2 stated in her evidence that on the date of the incident at about 11.30 A.M. or 12.00 noon she served food to her mother and was sitting on a mat. At that time the appellant questioned her mother as to why she was not sending PW2 with him and stabbed her mother with a knife on her stomach and left side of the waist, on witnessing the incident she raised cries and on hearing her cries, the neighbours gathered. PW.18, the doctor, who conducted postmortem examination, found the following anti-mortem injuries on the body of the deceased. “1. Stab wound 1½ “ x½ pleural cavity deep penetreating the right pleural cavity, situated in epigastric region of abdomen i.e., in Xiphisarnum region. Injury travelled oblquely piercing sternam bone left lobe of liver diaphragmmuscle and right pleura of right lung. It was antimortem in nature. Caused by sharp edged weapon like Mo1. 2. Stab wound 1½ “ x ½” subscantenum deep obliquely placed situated in right hypohchondrium of abdomin in midclavicalar line about 14” below right collor bone. 3” length of path towards right shoulder. It was antimortem in nature and would have been caused by sharp edged weapon like MO1. 3. Stab injury measuring 2½ “ x 1” obliquely placed subtaneously 3 ½” deep oblique path situated on right side of the chest lateran aspect in between anterior and posterior axiliary lines about 8” below the right axilla. Stab wound travelled obliquely towards right hipple. Antimortem injury would have been caused by sharp edged weapon. 4. Stab wound 1½ “ x ½ “ x 3” deep subcutaneously situated on back of the chest on the right side about 1” below and 2” behind stab wound 3. Stab wound travelled downwards and outwards. It is anitmortem in nature, would have been caused by sharp edged weapon like mo1.” He opined that the cause of death was due to hemorrhage shock (internal and external bleeding injuries) due to vital organs i.e., liver, right lung collapsed due to stab wound. Apart from the evidence of PW2, there is the evidence of PW3, who is the own sister of the deceased, which is to the effect that on the date of the incident at about 12.00 noon, she heard cries of PW2 and on hearing those cries, she rushed to the house of the deceased and she found the appellant running away from the place of occurrence and also found the deceased with bleeding injuries. She is one of the persons who shifted the deceased to the hospital. The evidence of PW6 reveals that on hearing the cries of PW2, she rushed to the house of deceased, found the deceased in a pool of blood and PW2 informed that the appellant stabbed the deceased with knife. What all stated by P.W.3 and forms part of the same transaction and admissible under Section 6 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 being spontaneous to the actual occurrence. The evidence of PW2 coupled with the evidence of PW3 and 6 leaves no manner of doubt whatsoever in our mind that the appellant alone is the author of the crime and nobody else. PW2 being none other than the wife of the appellant cannot be expected to give false evidence against the appellant even though there might be some misunderstandings between the couple. We see no reason to disbelieve the evidence of PW2 and the learned trial Court rightly placed reliance on the evidence of Pws.2, 3 and 6 who are natural and truthful witnesses and thus, the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court basing on such evidence do not call for any interference in this appeal and the same is confirmed. Accordingly, the criminal appeal is dismissed, confirming the judgment, dated 30.11.2006, in Sessions Case No.213 of 2006, passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Khammam. ______________ (D.S.R.VARMA, J) ________________ (R.KANTHA RAO, J) 13th October 2009 Ivd/RRB