HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1520 of 2007 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Raja Elango) This Criminal Appeal is directed against the conviction and sentence recorded in S.C.No.65 of 2007 by the I Addl. Sessions Judge, Kadapa, vide judgment dated 27.08.2007, whereby and whereunder the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant- accused herein under Section 235(2) Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and, accordingly, sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.100/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month, while acquitting him of the offences punishable under Sections 364 and 498-A IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under: i) The deceased Pikkili Lakshmi Devi @ Chinnakka is the wife of the accused. Their marriage gook place about 20 years back and they have been residing in Annampalli Village, Racharla Mandal, Prakasam District. They gave birth to two daughters and one son. The accused was addicted to all vices and subjecting the deceased to mental and physical cruelty demanding money for his vices. P.Ws.1 and 4 are brothers of the deceased. P.W.3 is the son of P.W.1. P.W.2, Pikkili Venkatesu and Pikkili Ramadevi are the children of the deceased and the accused. P.W.2 is the wife of P.W.3. ii) As the harassment of the deceased by the accused became unbearable, P.Ws.1 and 4 brought the deceased and the accused to their village four months prior to the death of the deceased. They stayed in the house of P.W.1 for some time. One month prior to the incident, they started residing separately. To help them, P.W.1 performed the marriage of P.W.2 with his son P.W.3 one month prior to the death of the deceased. Accused felt that the deceased and P.Ws.1 to 4 are ignoring him and developed grudge against the deceased. One day prior to the death of the deceased also, the accused beat the deceased and threatened her with dire consequences. iii) On 5.9.2006 evening, the accused made the deceased to believe that they would go to Giddalur for getting pledged gold ornaments released and to accompany him after informing to P.W.2. When they reached Pendlimarri tank bund, the accused asked the deceased to give her ear studs and assured her that he will get them back again, for which the deceased refused to give the same. Then, the accused forcibly took her into rubber plants in the tank bund and snatched ear studs (M.O.1) and nose screw (M.O.2). When the deceased resisted him, the accused pushed her down on the ground and sat on her chest and throttled her to death. On hearing her cries, P.Ws.1, 3 and 4 who were loading earth into a bullock cart in the tank, saw the incident and rushed there. On seeing them, the accused ran away. iv) Apprehending that the accused may attack him, P.W.1 did not give report on that night. On the next day morning, P.W.1 gave Ex.P.1 report to P.W.9, S.I. of Police, Kalasapadu P.S. who registered the same as Crime No.97 of 2006. Thereafter, P.W.10, Circle Inspector of Police, Porumamilla, took up investigation and after completion of investigation and on receipt of necessary reports from the authorities concerned, he laid charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 364 and 302 IPC. The plea of the accused was of total denial. 3. In order to prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined PWs. 1 to 10 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.14 apart from the case property M.Os.1 to 4. On behalf of the defence, no oral or documentary evidence was adduced. 4. P.W.1, brother of the deceased, deposed that the marriage of the deceased with the accused was performed 20 years prior to the occurrence. After marriage, the accused was addicted to vices of drinking and gambling and used to spend the earnings of the deceased also for his vices. As the harassment of the accused became unbearable, he brought the accused, the deceased and their children to his house. He maintained them keeping in his house for two months and thereafter, they started living in another house by taking it for rent. He further deposed that on the date of occurrence, his son P.W.3 and brother P.W.4 went to Pendlimari water tank in a double bullock cart to get some earth to his land. At about 6.00 p.m. they heard cries of a female. Then, himself and his son went towards that place where they saw the accused sitting on the chest of his sister and squeezing her neck with his hands in rubber plants. On seeing them, the accused ran away and his sister died. As it became night and also apprehending that the accused may attack him, on the next day morning at about 9.30 a.m. he went to Kalasapadu P.S. and lodged Ex.P.1 report with them. He further deposed that he informed to the children of the accused that their father killed their mother by throttling her neck. The children of the accused, in turn, informed him that their father and mother went to Giddalur to take back gold ornaments pledged there. Then, he along with the children of the deceased as well as village elders went to the place of incident and on seeing the dead body, daughter of deceased P.W.2 told him that gold ear studs and gold nose screw were missing from the dead body. 5. P.W.2, daughter of deceased and the accused, spoke about the harassment meted out by her mother in the hands of her father. She further deposed that on the date of death of his mother, at about 5.00 p.m. her parents left the house saying that they were going to Giddaluru to get their gold ornaments released from a pawn broker and at about 7.00 p.m. P.W.1, her husband and junior paternal uncle returned home and informed that her father killed her mother by throttling her neck in Pendlimarri tank and ran way. Then, all of them went to that place and saw the dead body of the deceased and she found that the ear studs and nose screw of her mother were missing and informed about the same to P.W.1. 6. P.W.3, son of P.W.1 and husband of P.W.2, deposed that on the date of the incident, at about 4.00 p.m. himself and P.Ws.1 and 4 went to Pendlimarri tank on a bullock cart to load earth into the cart. While they were working in the tank at about 6.00 p.m. they heard cries of a woman and then, they went to the place from where they heard cries and saw the accused pressing the neck of the deceased with his foot and on seeing them, the accused ran away. When he along with P.W.2 and villagers, on seeing the dead body, P.W.2 told them that the ear studs and nose screw of her mother were missing. 7. P.W.4 is the person who also accompanied P.Ws.1 and 3 in a bullock cart to Pendlimarri tank to load earth into the cart. While they were working in the tank, they heard cries of a woman and immediately they rushed to the place from where they heard the cries and saw the accused sitting on the chest of the deceased and squeezing her neck and on seeing them, the accused ran away. He further deposed that on seeing the dead body of the deceased, P.W.2 found that the gold nose screw and gold ear studs of her mother were missing. 8. According to P.W.5, the jeweler and pawn broker, on 6.9.2006 the accused pledged M.O.1 ear studs with him by borrowing Rs.800/- from him and he issued Ex.P.2 Pawn Card to the accused. He also obtained the signature of the accused on pledge form and Ex.P.3 is the original pledge form and Ex.P.4 is its duplicate carbon copy and he kept Ex.P.3 along with M.O.1 in a cover. On 13.9.2006, the police, Porumamilla P.S. along with the accused and two elders came to his shop and on enquiry, he informed them that the accused borrowed Rs.800/- from him and pledged M.O.1 ear studs. Having compared Ex.P.3 with Ex.P.4 in the book of pledge forms, they seized M.O.1 and Exs.P.3 and P.4 under cover of Ex.P.5 panchanama and he signed on it. 9. It is the evidence of P.W.6 that he conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased and found the following injuries: External injuries: 1) Left arm twisted back of chest. 2) Lenoir contusion of 3 cm x 10 cm present over neck extending from base of right sternocleidomastoideus muscle to left sternocleidomastoideus. Internal Injuries: 1) Neck tissues congested 2) Liver and lungs are congested. 3) Kidneys are also congested. 4) Stomach contains partly digested food particles. 5) Small intestines empty 6) Flautus present in large intestines. It is his further evidence that he issued Ex.P.7 Post Mortem certificate opining that that the injury on the neck is ante mortem in nature and after receipt of Ex.P.8 report given by the Professor, Medical College, Kurnool, he issued Ex.P.9 final post mortem certificate opining that the death of the deceased might have been due to throttling. 10. P.W.7 is a panch witness to Ex.P.10 inquest report and Ex.P.11 panchanama for arrest and seizure of M.O.3 cash of Rs.160/- and M.O.4 bundle of beedies and one match box. He accompanied the police for recovery of M.O.1 ear studs, Ex.P.3 original pledge form and Ex.P.4 duplicate of Ex.P.3. 11. P.W.8, Panchayat Secretary, Kalasapadu, deposed that he conducted identification parade of M.O.1 ear studs and M.O.2 nose screw by mixing them with other ear studs and nose screws and P.W.2 identified M.Os.1 and 2 as the ornaments belonging to her mother and Ex.P.12 is the identification panchanama prepared by him. P.Ws.9 and 10 are the Investigating Officers. 12. After evaluating both oral and documentary evidence available on record, the learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the accused as stated supra. Being aggrieved by the same, the accused preferred this criminal appeal. 13. We have heard both sides and perused the record. 14. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant-accused vehemently contended that there is a delay of 15 hours in lodging Ex.P.1 report and there is no proper explanation by the prosecution for the said delay and that P.Ws.1, 3 and 4 are the planted witnesses and hence their version cannot be believed and their evidence is not consistent with each other. 15. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor submitted that P.Ws.1, 3 and 4 are not only relations to the deceased but also to the accused and that on appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court rightly convicted and sentenced the accused and there are no grounds to interfere with the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court. 16. The evidence of P.W.1, who is none other than the brother of the deceased and brother-in-law of the accused, clearly indicates the reasons as to why he was present at the place of occurrence along with P.Ws.3 and 4. P.Ws.3 and 4 also supported his version and also stated the reasons for their presence at the place of occurrence and also their witnessing the accused committing the offence of murdering his wife. P.W.1 has explained the delay in lodging the complaint stating that as it became night and apprehending that the accused may attack him, he did not go to the police station on that day and on the next day morning he went to the police station and lodged the complaint. The said delay is not fatal to the case of the prosecution. Further, there is no need for P.W.1 to falsely implicate the accused in the case, in view of the fact that the said witness is not only relation to the deceased but also to the accused and, his son P.W.3 married the daughter (P.W.2) of the deceased and the accused. 17. P.Ws.1, 3 and 4, in one voice, deposed that on the date of occurrence, when they were loading earth into the double bullock cart in the Pendlimarri tank, they heard cries of a woman and immediately they went to the place from where they heard the cries and found the accused sitting on the chest of the deceased and squeezing her neck and on seeing them the accused ran away from the scene of offence. Their evidence is supported by the doctor P.W.6 as he stated that the deceased would appear to have died within 24 to 36 hours prior to the post mortem examination and the death of the deceased might have been due to throttling. 18. Further, in her evidence, P.W.2 categorically stated that on the date of incident at about 5.00 p.m. the accused and the deceased left the house saying that they were going to Giddaluru to get their gold ornaments released from a pawn broker and at about 7.00 p.m. P.W.1, her husband P.W.3 and P.W.4, after returning home, informed that her father killed her mother by throttling and, on seeing the dead body of her mother, she found that the ear studs and nose screw of her mother were missing. P.W.10, the Investigating Officer, after arresting the accused, recovered M.O.2 gold nose screw from him and, on his confession, recovered M.O.1 ear studs from the shop of P.W.5 under cover of Ex.P.5 panchanama. The said recovery is supported not only by panch witnesses but also by P.W.5 who stated that on the next day of occurrence, the accused pledged with him the gold ear studs by borrowing Rs.800/- from him and to that effect he issued Ex.P.2 pawn card to him. The said circumstances also clearly indicate that after commission of the crime, the accused pledged the gold ear studs with P.W.5. By the consistent evidence of P.Ws.1 to 6, the prosecution clinchingly established its case that the accused is the person who killed the deceased by throttling her neck, without any discrepancies. 19. The trial Court had analysed the matter from correct perspective and, hence, we are not inclined to interfere with the judgment under appeal. 20. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal confirming the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant by the trial Court. ____________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J __________________ RAJA ELANGO, J 13th July, 2011 cbs HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1520 of 2007 (Delivered by Hon’ble Sri Justice Raja Elango) 13th July, 2011 cbs HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1520 of 2007 Dated:13.07.2011 BETWEEN: Pikkili Venkata Ramudu … Appellant/ Accused AND The State of A.P., rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. …Respondent THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: