The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Respondent : Assistant Public Prosecutor The Court delivered the following: I I THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.23 OF 2O1O JUDGMENT: This Climinal Appeal is filed questioning the conviction imposed against the appellant/accused vide Judgment dated I l2.Ol.2O1O, passed in S.C.No.BB of 2OO9 on the frle of the III Additional Di strlct & Sessions Judge (FTC), Asifabad District, for the offences under Sections 498A and 304 Part-II of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, and perused the record.

3. A charge sheet was laid under Sections 498A ald 3O2 of IPC against the appellant. PW. 1 is the de ./acto complainant, who is the brother of Smt.Rathnamala (hereinafter referred to as'the deceased'). The deceased was married to the appellant in the year 2OO3. At the time of marriage, dowry was given, and also other household articles were given. Both the appellant and the deceased shifted to Naspur. The deceased gave birth to a baby boy. Before the birth of the baby boy, the deceased stayed with PW.1 for three months. The disputes started in between the appellant and the deceased for the reason of the 2 appellant allegedly having an affair with a woman by name Jyothi. The deceased used to inform PW. 1 and her parents regarding the appellant. having an affair with another woman. I Though the appellant was advised to refrain from meeting the said woman, he did not listen to the advise. arrd continued the relation with her.

4. The incident happened on 25.O4.2OO7, when there was a quarrel between the deceased and the appellant. During the said fight the deceased poured kerosene on herself and the appellant lit the fire with a match stick. Immediately, the neighbours, who are PWs.4, 7, 8, 9, and 10, went to the house of the appellant, and from there, the deceased was. shifted to the hospital. On the next day, the dying declaration was recorded by the Mandal Revenue Officer (MRO)-PW.l7. In the said statement made to MRO, the deceased narrated that there was a quarrel in between the spouses as the appellant was having an affair with someone else. She poured kerosene on herself, and at that juncture, the appellant lit fire. Again the deceased was examined by the Magistrate-PW. 18. Even in the statement made to the Magistrate, the deceased stated that the appellant was having an affair with a woman named Jyothi, and she was appellant's concubine. 3

5. Even the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation found that the appellant continued illicit intimacy with the said woman, and he used to talk with her over phone in the presence of the deceased. The quarrel on 25.04.2OO7, in between the deceased and the appellant was on account of the appellant talking to the said women over phone.

6. The Investigating Officer having concluded the investigation filed charge sheet for the offences under Sections 498A and 3O2 of IPC against the appellant.

7. The learned Sessions Judge found that the offence under Section 3O2 of IPC was not made out. However the offence is punishable under Section 3O4 Part-II of IPC since the appellant did not have any intention to cause death of the deceased, but he had knowledge that burns may result in death of the deceased.

8. Learned counsel appearing for the appellalt would submit that al1 the neighbours, who were examined as PWs.4, 7, 8, 9, and 10, stated that on hearing the deceased's shouts, they went to her residence and deceased informed them that she committed suicide. However, in the statement made to 4 MRO under Ex.P. 19, ald under Ex.P.2O the dying declaration made to the Magistrate, the deceased has falsely stated about the quarrel in between the spouses and that she poured kerosene on herself and the appellant lit fire. Learned counsel further argued that the said version given. before the MRO and the Magistrate was on account of tutoring. Tutoring is evident from the fact that the deceased informed her brother and mother in the hospital that she committed suicide. If the version ofthe deceased that the appellant burnt her is true, the same wouid have been reflected in the complaint filed by Pw- 1. It is not mentioned in the complaint that there was any kind of harassment for dowry.

9. The deceased was constantiy fighting with the appellant, which is stated by her in the two dying declarations. PW. 1, who is the brother of the deceased, also stated regarding the appellant having an affair with a woman by name Jyothi. The Investigating Officer-PW-2o also stated that the appellant was having illicit intimacy with a woman and he was talking with her over phone in the presence of the deceased. The reason for the disputes between the appellant and deceased is the said relation of appellant with Jyothi. However, not a single witness stated about the whereabouts of the said Jyothi or that they I I ! 5 have seen the appellant with the said Jyothi at any point of time. In dying declaration made to the Magistrate, the deceased stated that the appellant was providing maintenance to the said woman. It appears that the relation of the appellant with the said Jyothi was the reason for the disputes in tetween spouses. However, no reasons are given as to why the Investigating Officer has not attempted to examine the said Jyothi, or collect any phone records to substantiate that the appellant was talking with the said woman. It is not known whether the said Jyothi existed, since no details were given.

10. The evidence that the appellant was constantly hghting with the deceased is apparent. The defence of the appellant is that the allegations regarding the relation with the woman I / named Jyothi are false. 1 1 . A1l the neighbours, i.e., PWs.4, 7 , 8, 9, and 10 were declared hostile to the prosecution case. The evidence revea-ls that on the date of incident there was a quarrel in between the spouses. There is no reason as to why the deceased would speak false against her husband, stating that the appellant lit fire, when she doused herself with kerosene. Having relations with another woman during the subsistence of marriage i..:-.\ 6 amounts to cruelty. There is every possibility that the two . . $tatements made by the deceased are true. Accordingly, the conviction imposed against the appellant is confirmed. However, the sentence of imprisonment under Sections 49BA and 304 Part-ll of the IPC are reduced to six (O6) months. L2. Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal is allowed in part. The trial Court is directed to cause the appearance of the appellant/accused and send him to prison to serve out the remaining period of imprisonment. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// Sd/- K. SRINIVASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR \ To

1. The il Addt. District Asifabad. (With records) 2. The I Additional Judicia 3. The Station House Offi District. SECTION OFFICER and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court at I First Class [\4agistrate, tVlancherial. cer, Naspur Police Station, CCCA, Adilabad Superintendent, Central Jail, Waranoal. 1 Jt " 5- Two CCs to public prosecutor, HlSh C"r.t fZ. the State of Tetangana 6. One CC to Sri D Sangeetha Reddy, Advocate [OpUC] 7. fwo CD Copies Hyderabad. (OUT) I - ' vvqlv L\ DL/PRw ..* :; l; 1! liifl z ''l t'\ ', .: l l \.\.. (.,^.\ ,} \\o,, il?S 'v ^::) HIGH COURT DATED:121O212O25 I 1 JUDGMENT CRLA.No.23 ot 2O1O CRIMINAL APPEAL ALLOWED IN PART. @ Ib atr