- (1.)HEARD Smt. Shanthi Neelam, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-sole accused and the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent-State.
(2.)SOLE accused before the Sessions judge, Adilabad, having been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of rs. 1,0007- in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two months forthe offences under Section 302 IPC and also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month for the offence under Section 498-A, IPC filed the present criminal appeal.
(3.)THE case of prosecution is that on 13-4-2003 at about 12. 30 p. m. , one Abdul raheem (P. W. 13), the father of one Rayeesa begum (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased'), went to Bhainsa town police station and lodged a complaint to the effect that on 17-4-2000 he performed the marriage of his daughter Rayeesa Begum with the accused by giving Rs. 15,000/-, some gold ornaments and other household articles; that subsequently, about 15 days thereafter, the accused started harassing the deceased for additional dowry; that in spite of the conciliation made through elders, the accused did not change his attitude; that on one day, when there was a demand from the accused, the deceased went to P. W. 13, who is her father, and brought Rs. 3,000/-; that similarly, on two occasions the same type of demand was made by the accused and the same was satisfied and ultimately, when there was demand for Rs. 10,0007- from the accused, the same could not be fulfilled because of their inability; that on 13-4-2003, in the morning, the sister-in-law of P. W. 13 informed him over telephone about the death of deceased; that thereupon, P. W. 13 and his family members went to Bhainsa and saw his daughter dead and they expressed a doubt that she might have been killed by the accused since she did not bring the dowry amount, as demanded; that a case in Crime No. 27 of 2003 for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC was registered; that P. W. 15 (MRO) visited the scene of offence and held inquest over the dead body of deceased; that P. W. 12 along with one Dr. S. Rajeshwar Rao (L. W. 21)conducted post-mortem examination overthe dead body of deceased and opined that the death was due to asphyxia due to strangulation; and that therefore, the conclusion has been arrived at that the accused-husband alone was responsible for the death of deceased and also demand of additional dowry. Therefore, the charge-sheet was filed under sections 498-A and 302 IPC.