THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.887 OF 2009. DATED: 12-10-2009. Between: The State of A.P. rep. By Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. Hyderabad. … Appellant/Complainant and 1.Kavati Madhu and 2 others …Respondents/Accused THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.887 OF 2009. JUDGMENT: This Criminal Appeal by the State is directed against the order of acquittal of the respondents 1 to 3-A1 to A3 of the charge under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity ‘IPC’) passed by the Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Kothagudem, vide judgment, dated 01-11-2007, in S.C.No.385 of 2006. 2. Brief facts of that are necessary for disposal of the present appeal may be stated as follows: A1 is the husband and A2 and A3 are the parents-in-law of Kurapati Durga (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’). On 12-05- 2005, the marriage of the deceased with A1 was performed and at the time of marriage, cash of Rs.20,000/-, one acre of land, a gold ring and a cycle was given to A1 as dowry. After the marriage, all the accused started harassing the deceased to bring additional dowry and a double cot. They suspected her fidelity whenever she found talking with others. They forced her to sleep on floor for last three months for not bringing double cot. During Ashadamasam, when A1 went to the house of the parents of the deceased, he demanded to give a double cot and picked up a quarrel with them, refused to take ordinary cot and also refused to visit their house for Dasara festival. The deceased bear all the ill-treatment made to her with a hope that there may be change in the attitude of the husband. She informed to her parents about the ill-treatment made by the accused whenever she visited the house. But, the accused increased harassment towards her. Unable to bear the same, the deceased decided to put an end to her life. On 23-10-2005, the deceased consumed pesticides poison and was struggling for life. Immediately, she was shifted to a private hospital at Bhadrachalam and after providing first aid, while she was shifting to Kothagudem hospital, she died. On the complaint given by the complainant, police registered a case, investigated into it and after completion of investigation, filed charge sheet. 3. A charge under Section 304-B IPC was framed against the accused, read over and explained to them in Telugu, for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 4. To substantiate the charge, prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 11 and got marked Exs.P1 to P11. No evidence either oral or documentary was adduced on behalf of the accused. 5. The trial Court after considering the evidence of P.Ws.1,2,4 and 8 found the accused not guilty as their evidence appears to be improvement made during the course of trial and accordingly, acquitted the accused. Hence, this appeal by the State. 6. Now the point for determination is whether the prosecution proved its case against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt of the charge under Section 304-B IPC? 7. Heard the counsel representing the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the judgment. 8. There cannot be any dispute that dealing with an order of acquittal, the appellate Court is slow in interfering with the same. Unless the findings are perverse or not based upon any evidence, normally this Court will not interfere with the same. There is a presumption under law that the accused is presumed to be innocent unless contrary is proved. The presumption of innocence is further strengthened by an order of acquittal. 9. The prosecution relied upon the evidence of P.Ws. 1,2 and 8 to show that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment for or in connection with demand of dowry. Unnatural death of the deceased is not in dispute. Similarly, the death occurred otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years after the marriage is also not in dispute. The prosecution must establish that the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment for or in connection with demand of dowry soon before her death. To substantiate the same, P.Ws. 1, 2 and 8 were examined. For the first time, they stated before the Court that the accused were harassing the deceased to bring a double cot bed and also handover possession of one acre of land. The statements of P.Ws. 1,2 and 8 with regard to cruelty or harassment for or in connection with demand of dowry are improvements made by these witnesses during the course of trial. None of the witnesses stated to the police when they were examined under Section 161 (3) Cr.P.,C. about the cruelty or harassment or with regard to demand of dowry. When the improvements made by the witnesses go to the root of the prosecution case, then those improvements cannot be brushed aside lightly. Due importance should be given to those improvements made by the witnesses. As the initial stage of investigation does not disclose with regard to harassment or cruelty for or in connection with demand of dowry, the trial Court rightly placed no reliance on the evidence of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 8. Barring these three witnesses, there is no other evidence to show that the accused committed the offence punishable under Section 304-B IPC. The trial Court after elaborate consideration of evidence on record, rightly acquitted the accused and absolutely, there are no ground to interfere with the same. 10. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed confirming the judgment, dated 01-11-2007, in S.C.No.385 of 2006, on the file of the Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Kothagudem. --------------------- K.C.BHANU, J DATED:12-10-2009 Hsd