Telangana High Court
Perikolla Srikanth, Ranga Reddy Dt., vs The State Of Telangana, Rep Pp., on 18 February, 2025
1
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. ANIL KUMAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.787 OF 2017
JUDGMENT:
(per Hon'ble Sri Justice K.Surender)
1. The Appeal is filed by the appellant/A-1 aggrieved by
the judgment dated 05.07.2017, in S.C.No.183 of 2016, on
the file of SVI Additional District and Sessions Judge-Cum-
XVI Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad at
Malkajgiri, Ranga Reddy District. The appellant was
convicted for the offence under Section 302 of IPC and
sentenced to life imprisonment.
2. Learned counsel on record, on earlier occasion,
appeared and informed that appellant has taken back the
file. This Court by order dated 28.01.2025 issued warrants.
Learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Medchal-
Malkajgiri District at Malkajgiri, addressed a letter vide
Lr.Dis.No.721/ADMN/2025, dated 10.02.2025, to Registrar
(Judicial-I) informing that the appellant's whereabouts were
not known and he was also involved in another case
registered at P.S.Alwal. In the said circumstances, when no
alternate arrangements were made by the appellant, we have
gone through the record and taken the assistance of learned
Additional Public Prosecutor.
3. The appellant herein, A-2, and A-3 were tried by the
learned Sessions Court. During the pendency of the trial,
A-2 died, as such, the case was abated against him. Learned
Sessions Judge acquitted A-3 since there was no reliable
evidence to convict him.
4. The case of the prosecution is that appellant was
married to Srikala (deceased) on 28.06.2007. At the time of
marriage, cash of Rs.2,50,000/- and other house hold
articles were given towards dowry. After three or four months
of marriage, A-1 to A-3 started harassing the deceased for
additional dowry of Rs.2,00,00/- for purchasing car by A-1.
The mother of the deceased/P.W.1, arranged 4 tulas of gold
and gave it to the appellant. However, harassment did not
stop.
5. The deceased was found dead in her house on
05.04.2015. It was informed to the Police and the Police
inturn, informed P.W.1 regarding the death of P.W.1's
daughter. Accordingly, P.W.1 and others went to the hospital
and on enquiry, P.W.4 informed P.W.1 and others that the
appellant smothered the deceased with a pillow. The
appellant also gave fist blows on the face of the deceased.
6. The Investigating Officer received the complaint/Ex.P.1.
Thereafter, dead body was shifted to Osmania General
Hospital. At the hospital, inquest was held and thereafter,
body was sent to post mortem examination. P.W.10 is the
Doctor, who conducted post mortem examination. He found
the following injuries on the deceased:
"1) Bruising of 7 cm x 4 cm present on nose, Red
in colour.
2) Abrasion of 9 cm x 2 cm present on left side
of the neck. Extending from left back neck to
left front neck. Horizontal at the level of
thyroid cartilage caused by ligature red in
colour.
3) Soft tissue under ligature mark is contused.
4) hyoid bone and thyroid are intact."
7. According to the post mortem Doctor, the time of death
was 12 hours prior to post mortem examination. Post
mortem was conducted in between 1:15 p.m. and 2:45 p.m.
on 06.04.2015.
8. On 12.04.2015, the appellant was apprehended.
Confession statement was recorded and thereafter, he was
produced before the concerned Magistrate. After conclusion
of investigation, P.W.11 filed charge sheet against A-1 to A-3
for the offences under Sections 498-A and 302 of IPC.
9. Learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant on the
basis of evidence of P.Ws.1 to 6. P.W.4 is the daughter of the
appellant who is the eye witness to smothering by the
appellant. Accordingly, the appellant/A-1 was convicted.
However, the learned Sessions Judge extended benefit of
doubt to A-3. Having gone through the record, P.Ws.1 to 3, 5
and 6 stated about the differences in between the deceased
and the appellant. According to them, there were constant
fights between them.
10. The defense of the accused is that he never demanded
any amount, nor did he have any fights with the deceased.
The deceased committed suicide in a drunken condition and
she was in a habit of consuming alcohol.
11. The version of suicide was ruled out by the evidence of
Doctor/P.W.10. According to P.W.10, the cause of death was
due to pressure over the nose and neck. P.W.4, who is the
daughter of the appellant, stated that the appellant took the
deceased into a room and pressed the face of the deceased
with a pillow. The evidence of P.W.4, whose name also
figured in the complaint, corroborates with the medical
evidence.
12. Once the appellant takes the defense of deceased
committing suicide by consuming poison in a drunken state,
it is for the appellant to prove the circumstances under which
she committed suicide. Admittedly, P.W.4, deceased,
appellant, and other children were staying in the very same
house. The death was homicidal, and the post mortem
Doctor did not find any insecticide poison or alcohol during
the course of post mortem examination.
13. Since it is not disputed that the appellant, deceased
and children were living under one roof, the burden lies on
the appellant to prove the cause of the death of the deceased.
The appellant did not elicit any evidence to suggest that he
was not in the house, when the incident had taken place. In
fact, his case is that deceased committed suicide by
consuming poison, which is not true according to the post
mortem Doctor.
14. The evidence of P.W.4, who is the daughter of the
deceased, is clear that it was the appellant who had
smothered the deceased. There are absolutely no grounds to
interfere with the conviction recorded by the learned Sessions
Judge.
15. Accordingly, the Appeal is dismissed. The Police shall
take steps to arrest the appellant, who is now absconding
and produce before the concerned Court to be sent to prison
to serve out the remaining part of the sentence imposed by
the trial Court.
_________________
K.SURENDER, J
___________________
J. ANIL KUMAR, J
Date: 18.02.2025
dv
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. ANIL KUMAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.787 OF 2017
Dt. 18.02.2025
dv
