Telangana High Court
Vadde Yadaiah vs The State Of Telangana, on 27 February, 2025
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
and
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1410 OF 2017
JUDGMENT:
1. The appellants are A1 and A2. Both the appellants were
convicted under Sections 498-A and 302 of IPC and sentenced to
undergo three years and life imprisonment, respectively, vide
judgment in S.C.No.88 of 2011, dated 18.12.2014, passed by the
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vikarabad. A2 was released
on remission by the Government. Accordingly, the appeal is heard
insofar as A1 is concerned.
2. Briefly, the case of the prosecution is that the appellant was
married to the deceased, namely Anitha. P.Ws.1 and 2 are the
mother and father of the deceased, respectively. P.W.1 went to the
police station and lodged complaint on 09.10.2009, at 10.00 A.M. In
the complaint, she narrated that the deceased was married to the
appellant 1 ½ years prior to the complaint. Rs.10,000/- cash and
10 grams of gold were given at the time of marriage. The appellant
and A2 used to torture the deceased physically and mentally. In
fact, a panchayat was also held to resolve the issues in between the
appellant and the deceased. It is further stated in the complaint
that on 09.10.2009, around 7.30 a.m, while P.W.1 was at home,
she received information on phone that the deceased was rushed to
Area Hospital in Dornal village, as deceased suffered burn injuries,
and her condition was serious. P.W.1, then rushed to the village
and met the deceased in the hospital, where she was found to be
completely burnt. The deceased then narrated to P.W.1 that, in the
morning around 7.30 a.m, the appellant and A2 abused her for
being careless, and suddenly, the appellant poured kerosene onto
her and set her on fire. The act of burning by A1 was supported by
A2.
3. The police, having received complaint, registered the case and
gave requisition to the Magistrate for recording dying declaration.
The dying declaration was recorded by Magistrate/P.W.7. P.W.7
went to the hospital around 4.30 p.m, on the same day. He put
preliminary questions to the deceased and after being satisfied that
the deceased was in a fit state of mind, started recording her
statement. The deceased stated that, she was married to the
appellant about 1 ½ years prior to the incident, and at the time of
marriage, cash and gold ring were given, along with 10 grams of
gold. The appellant was promised that another gold ring and
Rs.12,000/- will be given subsequently. Deceased further narrated
that the husband/appellant sold her ring, and her parents thought
that if the gold, which was given, was already sold, he would take
the amount of Rs.12,000/- and spend to drink alcohol. A2 also
used to harass her to get more gold and both of them tortured her
physically and mentally. The community elders held a meeting to
resolve the issues, however, on the date of the incident, the
appellant suddenly poured kerosene on her and set her ablaze.
Hearing her shouts, the neighbours came there, and took her to the
hospital.
4. The deceased died on 14.10.2009. The appellant was arrested
on 16.10.2009. After concluding investigation, the police filed a
charge sheet against the appellant and A2 for the offence under
Section 302 of IPC.
5. During the course of trial, P.W.1/mother of the deceased,
P.W.2/father of the deceased and P.W.3/independent witnesses,
were treated hostile to the prosecution case, since all three of them
resiled from their earlier statements. The parents of the deceased,
P.Ws.1 and 2, stated that the deceased committed suicide unable to
bear severe stomach ache. P.W.1 and 2 further stated that the said
information was given by the deceased, when P.W.1 enquired with
the deceased in the hospital.
6. P.W.4 is the inquest panch. P.W.5 is the scene of offence
panchanama witness. P.W.6 is the postmortem doctor, who stated
that the death was on account of burns. P.W.7 is the Magistrate,
who recorded dying declaration Ex.P10. P.Ws.8, 9, and 10 are the
investigating officers. Part of investigation was done by P.Ws.8 and
9, and thereafter, P.W.10 filed charge sheet after concluding
investigation.
7. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit
that there are contradictory versions in the complaint and the dying
declaration of the deceased. Further, the parents of the deceased
turned hostile to the prosecution case. In the absence of any other
evidence, the dying declaration, cannot solely form basis to convict
the appellant.
8. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor would
submit that there is no reason why the deceased would speak false
against the appellants.
9. Having perused the record, the complaint was filed on
09.10.2009, at 10.00 a.m. The incident happened at 7.00 a.m, on
the same day. Even according to the evidence of P.W.1, in the
Court, and also in Ex.P1-complaint, P.W.1 met the deceased in the
hospital and enquired with her, and later lodged complaint before
the police. The dying declaration of the deceased was recorded by
the Magistrate/P.W.7, at 4.30 p.m, on the same day. The only
evidence against the appellant is the dying declaration Ex.P10.
10. Though, a dying declaration can form sole basis for conviction,
however, the statement given by the deceased should be believable.
According to the dying declaration, the marriage was held 1 ½ years
prior and some amount was to be given to the appellant. She
further stated that the gold ring was given and the same was sold
by the appellant, and the parents of the deceased did not give any
further amount on the ground that earlier amount that was given
was spent to meet his alcohol expenses. A2/mother-in-law also
used to abet the appellant herein, and both of them used to harass
her physically and mentally.
11. The version of harassment is not stated by any of the
witnesses. The parents of the deceased, P.Ws.1 and 2 turned hostile
to the prosecution case, and stated that the deceased committed
suicide due to stomach ache.
12. In the absence of any other corroborating evidence regarding
harassment, the circumstances under which the statement was
made to the Magistrate, has to be looked into. As already
discussed, P.W.1 met the deceased in the hospital in the morning
itself and thereafter, she lodged complaint at 10.00 a.m. The
possibility of P.W.1 and other relatives, tutoring the deceased to
speak against the appellant, cannot be ruled out. Though the
deceased, in her statement before the Magistrate, stated regarding
several events, including the details of dowry harassment, etc.,
however, none of the events narrated by the deceased finds
corroboration.
13. In the back ground of the present facts and circumstances of
the case, when the possibility of tutoring by the mother and others,
cannot be ruled out, the conviction cannot be based solely on the
dying declaration of the deceased. For the said reason, the
appellant succeeds and the conviction recorded by the trial Court
against A1 in S.C.No.88 of 2011, dated 18.12.2014, is hereby set
aside. Since the appellant/A1 is in jail, he shall be released
forthwith, if he is not required in any other case.
14. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal is allowed. Miscellaneous,
applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
__________________
K.SURENDER, J
__________________________________
ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI, J
Date: 27.02.2025
kvs
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
and
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1410 of 2017
Date: 27.02.2025
kvs
