Telangana High Court
Jukanti Vijay Kumar Reddy vs State Of Telangana on 10 April, 2025
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1800 of 2018
JUDGMENT:
(per The Hon'ble Sri Justice K.SURENDER)
This appeal is filed by the appellant/accused, aggrieved by the
conviction recorded by the Judge, Family Court-cum-Additional
Sessions Judge, Nizamabad, in SC.No.209 of 2016 dated
30.12.2017, convicting the accused for the offence under Section
304-B of IPC and sentencing him to undergo Life Imprisonment.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Arun Kumar
Dodla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Sri M.Vivekananda
Reddy, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the
respondent-State.
3. The appellant was charge-sheeted for the offences under
Sections 302 and 304 (B) of IPC.
4. The learned Sessions Judge found that the death was suicidal
and accordingly acquitted the appellant under Section 302 of IPC.
5. The case of the prosecution is that the appellant, Jukanti
Vijay Kumar Reddy of Panakati Kapu caste, married Gadde
Hemalatha, the deceased, around three years prior to the incident,
and their marriage was an inter-caste marriage. They led their
marital life happily for some days at Ugravai Village, and later, due
to financial problems, they shifted the family to Kamareddy, where
they used to quarrel now and then. The accused used to force the
deceased to get money from her mother, but she disclosed the
poverty of her mother, and her mother was helpless. The spouses
did not have children. The accused decided to do away with the life
of the deceased so that he could marry another woman, take dowry
from her, and get rid of his financial problems. Thus, as per his
plan, on 10.08.2014, the appellant picked up a quarrel with the
deceased, made her lie on the bed, sat on her abdomen, and
throttled her to death. On information of her lying without
movement, on 10.08.2014 at 4.30 p.m, PW.1, Gadde Bhagya,
mother of the deceased, lodged Ex.P1 report with the police of
Kamareddy town Police Station about the incident.
6. The Police investigated the case, arrested the accused, and
filed a charge sheet under Sections 302 and 304-B of IPC.
7. Learned Counsel for the appellant had raised several grounds
regarding the contradictions between the statements of the
witnesses. Learned Counsel further argued that the alleged
allegations of demand for additional dowry are not proximate to the
death of the deceased. In the absence of the prosecution proving
that there was a demand for additional dowry and consequently, the
deceased was harassed, the question of conviction under Section
304-B of IPC does not arise.
8. Alternatively, the counsel submits that the appellant had
undergone 7 years of imprisonment and prays to reduce the
sentence of imprisonment to the minimum sentence of 7 years.
9. Having gone through the evidence, it is the case of PW.1-
mother of the deceased that the appellant used to harass the
deceased in a drunken condition. The deceased did not have any
children. After shifting to Kamareddy, the appellant started
demanding additional dowry, for which reason Rs.20,000/- and
Rs.30,000/- were given. Though the said amounts were given, the
appellant continued to harass the deceased.
10. The evidence of harassment by the appellant, though narrated
as an omnibus allegation of beating the deceased in a drunken
condition, however, the allegation is in proximity with the death of
the deceased.
11. In the said circumstances, while confirming the conviction, we
deem it appropriate to reduce the sentence of imprisonment to
seven years.
12. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal is partly allowed. Since the
appellant had undergone seven years imprisonment, he shall be
released forthwith if not required in any other case.
__________________
K.SURENDER, J
_____________________
E.V.VENUGOPAL, J
Date: 10.04.2025
tk
