THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY And THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Crl.A.No. 1476 of 2007 ORDER: ( per RE,J) This appeal is filed by the State, against the judgment dated 05.10.2005, passed in S.C.No.175 of 2002, on the file of the Court of V Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), West Godavari, Eluru, whereunder and whereby the accused were found not guilty of the charges levelled against them and consequently, they were acquitted. The brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of this appeal are as follows: Smt. Undrajavarapu Indira (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) is the wife of accused No.2. During their conjugal life, they were blessed with two children i.e., daughter by name Kumari Undrajavarapu Hamsaveni (PW15) and son by name Master Undrajavarapu Malleswara Rao. After the birth of the children, accused Nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 who are mother-in-law, husband, and brothers-in-law respectively of the deceased started harassing her both mentally and physically by demanding to bring money from her parents’ house. The deceased unable to bear with the harassment, used to go to her parents’ house and also to the house of her relatives and they used to send the deceased to the house of the accused requesting the accused not to harass the deceased for money and requesting them to live amicably. While the matter stood thus, the accused constructed a building consisting of two portions. Accused No.2 and the deceased used to live in one portion and the other accused used to live in another portion. Accused No.1 who is the mother-in-law and her husband planned to bring their newly married third daughter-in-law and put the couple in the portion wherein accused No.2 and the deceased were residing. All the accused demanded the deceased to bring money for the newly constructed house and also demanded her to sell away the landed property, which is in her name. On 29.06.2001, at about 11.00 A.M., the deceased went to the Church to offer her prayers and at about 2.00 P.M. accused No.2 called her to the house in the middle of the prayers. Then all the accused abused the deceased demanding her to bring money to meet the expenses of the newly constructed house and accused No.2 beat the deceased at the instance of accused No.1. For that, the deceased has got aversion over her life and unable to bear the harassment, poured kerosene over her body and tried to lit fire. Then accused Nos. 1 and 4 intervened and accused No.2 pulled the matchbox and matchstick from the hands of the deceased. As the kerosene fell in her eyes, the deceased was cleaning her eyes in the bedroom. At that time, at the instance of A1, A4 pulled the matchbox and matchstick from the hands of accused No.2 and lit fire on the person of the deceased. As a result of the same, the deceased received extensive burn injuries. PWs. 3 and 5 who are paternal aunts of the deceased, took her to Primary Health Centre and to a Private Hospital at Chebrole. Later, the deceased was shifted to the Government Hospital, Tadepalligudem in a taxi of Thota Sreenu with the assistance of accused No.2. On receipt of intimation from the hospital about the incident, PW19 Head Constable, Tadepalligudem Town Police Station visited the hospital and recorded the statement of the deceased and transmitted the same to the Sub Inspector of Police, Chebrole, (PW20) on the point of jurisdiction who registered the same as Cr.No.52 of 2001 under Sections 307 and 498-A I.P.C. and issued F.I.R. (Ex.P32). The Sub Inspector of Police, Chebrole visited the hospital, recorded the statement of the deceased and observed the scene of offence in the presence of mediators and got prepared a scene of offence observation report and rough sketch of the scene of offence. On requisition from the police, Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tadepalligudem (PW18) recorded the dying declaration of the deceased on 29.06.2001. The deceased succumbed to the burn injuries on 08.08.2001 at about 9.00 A.M. in the Government Hospital Tadepalligudem, while undergoing treatment. On receipt of death intimation of the deceased, the Sub Inspector of Police, Chebrole (PW20) altered the section of law from Sections 307 and 498-A I.P.C. to Sections 302 and 498-A I.P.C. on 08.08.2001 and issued an altered F.I.R. Ex.P35. The Inspector of Police, Ganapavaram Circle (PW21) took up investigation in this case and got held inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of mediators and got prepared an inquest report. Dr.V.Manoranjan, Civil Assistant Surgeon, Government Hospital, Tadepalligudem (PW17) conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased. The material objects recovered were sent to Regional Forensic Science Laboratory for chemical examination and the report was received from Regional Forensic Science Laboratory stating that blood was found on the material objects. During the course of inquest, the Inspector of Police (PW21) examined the witnesses and on completion of investigation, he laid the charge sheet against the respondents - accused before the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tadepalligudem, who registered it as PRC No. 3 of 2002 and later committed to the Court of Sessions. On committal, the learned Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru registered the same as S.C No. 175 of 2002 and made over to the learned V Additional Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru who framed necessary charges against the accused as aforementioned and explained the same to them in Telugu. The accused denied the charges and claimed to be tried. To substantiate its case, the prosecution examined PWs 1 to 21 and marked Exs. P1 to P36. On behalf of the defence, Ex.D1 was marked to substantiate the contradiction in the statement of PW 5 recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. In the present case, most of the witnesses turned hostile and did not support the case of the prosecution except the witnesses viz., doctor who conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased, the head constable who registered the F.I.R. and the investigating officer who collected the evidence and filed the charge sheet. The learned Sessions Judge after evaluating the evidence adduced by the prosecution acquitted the accused, against which the present appeal is preferred. Learned Public Prosecutor contends that the dying declaration recorded by the Magistrate which is marked as Ex.P29 and also the statement given by the deceased before the Head Constable which is marked as Ex.P31 which is in the nature of dying declaration, if inspire the confidence of the Court, there is no need for any corroboration to substantiate the same. In contra, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that there is no doubt that if the dying declaration is cogent in nature and without any discrepancies implicating the accused, there is no need for corroboration but, in the present case, this Court has to see whether Exs.P29 and 31 prove involvement of the respondents - accused so as to interfere with the judgment of the trial Court. Heard the arguments and perused the records. To decide the issue a perusal of Exs. P29 and P31 is necessary. Ex.P29 was recorded by the Magistrate on 29.06.2001, on the date of occurrence at 7.00 P.M. The statement recorded by the learned Magistrate is reproduced below for better appreciation: “In our house disputes arose as I did not took dowry amount. Everyday my mother-in-law raised dispute. My mother-in-law had three male sons. Constructed daba. Daily she raised dispute to go-away from the house. My husband looked me well, but on the instigation of his mother revolted against me. We had one female and one male children. Today I went to prayer and after return from there, they raised dispute and talked as they like. My mother-in-law not showed willingness to live even my husband and children also in that house. My husband beat me on today, but I don’t know the reason, because of that unbearable harassment I commit to suicide by pouring kerosene on myself, what was happened later, I don’t know, in my presence my mother-in-law and younger brother- in-law were present. Because of pains from the flames I went to the water-tub and jumped into it. I was shifted to hospital”. In the said dying declaration, it is stated by the deceased that she herself poured kerosene on her and attempted to commit suicide and she also stated that she does not know as to what has happened subsequent thereto. She further stated that she is not aware whether her mother-in-law and younger brother-in-law are present or not. Thus, it is clear that she has not stated anything against the accused. In this case except mentioning that there was some dispute between the mother-in-law and herself in connection with dowry amount, she has not stated anything about the harassment for dowry. On the same day, the Head Constable recorded the statement of the deceased at 7.30 P.M. The relevant portion runs as follows: “So that I vexed with my life as my husband also abused me and on that I decided to put an end to my life is better than to bear abusing words and on that I went into a room in my house and poured kerosene on myself from top to bottom and on that my vision was blurred as which were covered with kerosene and on that I sat on the floor, then suddenly flames attacked me, but I don’t know who lit fire with match stick and thrown it on me, as a result of which my chest, back, both hands and legs were brunt and because of the burnt pains from my body to extinguish them I step-in into the water tub which was at our house. The neighbours called my husband and on that my husband came and admitted me in Government Hospital, Tadepalligudem by took in a car. In the said statement also she has not specifically implicated any person so as to attract the offences under Sections 498-A and 302 I.P.C. and further, the witnesses of the prosecution also did not support the case of the prosecution as projected by the prosecution. The learned Sessions Judge opined that the contents of the present dying declaration does not implicate any of the respondents herein. The learned Sessions Judge actually believed the dying declaration but at the same time as the contents therein does not implicate the respondents herein, acquitted them. In an appeal against acquittal, the scope of this Court is very limited and if any perversity or illegality appears on the face of the record, then only this Court can interfere with the finding of the lower Court. It is well settled that in an appeal against acquittal, the Appellate Court can interfere only when there is possibility of one view, which is pointing towards the guilt of the accused. When there is possibility of two views and one view, which is in favour of the accused, is taken into account and the accused is acquitted by the competent Court, there is no need to interfere with the order passed by the trial Court. Most importantly in the present case, the entire evidence adduced by the prosecution is not pointing the guilt towards the respondents herein. Hence, the learned Sessions Judge has rightly acquitted the accused. The said judgment does not suffer with any infirmities to interfere. Hence, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed accordingly. A.GOPAL REDDY,J RAJA ELANGO,J Dt. 30.06.2011 lvl THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY And THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Crl.A.No.1476 of 2007 ( per RE,J) Dt. 30.06.2011