Raghvendra Singh Chauhan - (1.)Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence of life imposed upon him for the offence under Section 302 IPC, aggrieved by the imposition of fine of Rs.2,000/-, and further aggrieved by the direction that in default thereof, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month, the appellant, Jarpati Sreenu, has challenged the legality of the judgment dated 01-10-2012, passed by the VII Additional Sessions Judge (FAC) Judge, Family Court -cum- Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar.
(2.)Briefly, the facts of the case are that, Pasupula Sayanna had submitted a complaint (Ex.P.12) before the Sub-Inspector of Police, PS Koilkonda (PW.14), wherein he had alleged that about four months ago, he had performed the marriage of his youngest daughter, Savithri, with the appellant, Jarpati Srinu. Ever since the date of the marriage, the appellant and his mother, Venkatamma (accused No.2 in the Sessions Case), were physically and mentally harassing his daughter. His daughter informed him and his wife, Bheemamma (PW.1), that on 11-04-2011, they are going to Hyderabad for working as coolies. Therefore, she requested them to visit her at her matrimonial home. Hence, on 10-04-2011, both the complainant and his wife, Bheemamma (PW.1), reached her home at Rampur village. After having meals, his daughter, and his son-in-law slept in a room; his wife, his daughter's mother-in-law and he slept outside. At about 1:00 a.m., his daughter's mother-inlaw woke up his daughter, and told her to prepare the food. But his daughter did not wake up. However, later when she saw her mother-in-law cleaning the rice, she went and prepared the food. At about 2:00 a.m., his daughter went back to her husband, and slept. The other inmates of the house also slept. However, at 4:00 am, his daughter came out crying "Daddy I am dead". While she was descending from the steps, she fell down. While his daughter was in flames, he put out the flames with a blanket. Immediately, he and his wife shifted their daughter to the Government Hospital, in 108 ambulance, for treatment. He does not know as to how his daughter got burnt, but he suspects his son-in-law, Sreenu (appellant), and his daughter's mother-in-law, Venkatamma.
(3.)On the basis of this complaint (Ex.P.12), a formal FIR, namely FIR No. 43 of 2011 (Ex.P.11), was chalked out for offence under Section 498-A IPC. Subsequently, with the death of Savithri, the offence was altered from merely Section 498-A IPC to Sections 302 and 498-A IPC. During the course of investigation, the appellant and his mother, Venkatamma, were arrested and put up for trial.