Chintala Bbharathamma, Nalgonda ... vs State Of A.P.,Rep.By P.P.,High ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5377 Tel

               HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

                CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1478 of 2010
JUDGMENT:

1. The appellants are aggrieved by the conviction for the offence

under Section 498-A of IPC and sentenced to three years rigorous

imprisonment vide judgment in SC No.425 of 2009, dated

15.11.2010 passed by the III Additional District & Sessions Judge (

I FTC), Nalgonda, filed the present appeal.

2. The case of the prosecution is that A1 was married to the

deceased on 06.05.2007. At the time of marriage, Rs.3,50,000/-

cash and gold ornaments were given. Having led their marital life

for a period of one month, the appellants/ A2 and A3, who are the

parents of A1, and also A1, A4 and A5( A1, A4 and A5 were

acquitted), harassed the deceased for getting additional dowry and

also used to say that the deceased was unlucky. The harassment

continued over a period of time and unable to bear the harassment

of these appellants and other accused, she poured kerosene on

herself and set fire. The police, having investigated the case, filed

charge sheet for the offence under Section 304-B of IPC against

these appellants and three other accused.

3. P.W.2, who is the mother of the deceased stated that dowry

was given and that the appellants and other accused were also

harassing her deceased daughter. P.Ws.4 and 5, who are relatives

also narrated regarding the harassment by the appellants and other

accused.

4. Learned Sessions Judge, on the basis of the Dying Declaration

Ex.P10 found that the appellants herein, who are parents-in-law

were responsible for harassing her. In the Dying Declaration, the

deceased stated that her in-laws, who are the appellants were

abusing her every day and stated that they did not like her. On the

previous day also, since in-laws abused her, the deceased stated

that on the next day, she tried to commit suicide. For the said

reason, the learned Sessions Judge found that no offence was made

out against any of the accused under Section 304-B of IPC.

However, sentenced these appellants, who are parents in-law of the

deceased under Section 498-A of IPC.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that similar

allegations were leveled against A1, A4 and A5. However, they were

acquitted of the charge. The Dying Declaration, which was recorded

cannot be made basis to convict the appellants for the reason of

there being no specific details, which were stated in the Dying

Declaration. The allegations regarding harassment, as stated by the

mother and other relatives of the deceased were omnibus in nature

as far as the offences are concerned, for which reason, these

appellants are entitled to be acquitted.

6. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor submits that

there is no reason why the deceased would give false statement

against the appellants herein. For the reason of the deceased

specifically stating that she has no grievance against husband,

except the appellants herein, learned Sessions Judge was right in

convicting the appellants and acquitting others.

7. The evidence of the mother and relatives, P.Ws.4 and 5 is

consistent and they specifically stated that after marriage, these

appellants and others, i.e., husband, sister-in-law and brother-in-

law of the deceased also harassed the deceased. Though the

witnesses stated very specifically against A1, for the said reason, it

cannot be said that whatever the deceased has stated in her Dying

Declaration is incorrect. Though, no specific instances were

narrated in the Dying Declaration, in the back ground of the burns

received, it cannot be expected that the deceased while undergoing

treatment and when in pain, would narrate the details of

harassment. The deceased has specifically stated that these

appellants, who are her parents-in-law, did not like her and were

verbally abusing her on a daily basis. Though, no specific details or

narration is given by the deceased, it can be reasonably inferred

that these appellants, who are parents-in-law were acting and

saying words in the manner in which the deceased was offended.

8. For the said reasons, I find no grounds to interfere with the

order of conviction under Section 498-A of IPC. Though the learned

counsel for the appellants argued that there was no proper charge

which was framed under Section 498-A of IPC, the contents of the

charge framed under Section 304-B of IPC clearly indicates that

charge was also framed for harassing her and consequence of

which, the deceased committed suicide. The grounds urged by the

learned counsel for the appellants that in the absence of charge

being framed under Section 498-A of IPC, learned Sessions Judge

committed mistake in convicting the appellants for the said offence,

cannot be accepted.

9. However, the case is of the year 2008 and the appellants have

crossed 60 years of age. At this juncture, sending the appellants to

prison, in my opinion, would not serve any useful purpose. Since

the appellants were in jail during the course of investigation,

interest of justice would be met, if the sentence is reduced to the

period already undergone by the appellants.

10. In the result, the judgment of the trial Court in SC No.425 of

2009 dated 15.11.2010 is confirmed. However, the sentence of

imprisonment is reduced to the period already undergone by the

appellants.

11. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is disposed off.

__________________ K.SURENDER, J Date: 27.10.2022 kvs

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1478 of 2010

Date: 27.10.2022.

kvs