Therefore, his statement was recorded on 13.2.1993.
He sent the stomach companytents as well as the hyoid bone for chemical analyzer and experts opinion and received an information from the chemical analyzer that the stomach companytents did number companytain any poisonous substance and the expert who examined the hyoid bone found that the bone was number fractured or damaged.
It is stated that the investigating officer was unable to trace the appellant immediately.
On receipt of the said information and on receiving a questionnaire from investigating officer, PW 8 doctor opined that he is unable to give any opinion as to the cause of death.
Then PW 1 called his neighbour PW She came and attended the deceased and found that the deceased had died by then.
The first information was lodged only at about 11 p.m. by PW 1, which is marked as Ex.
PW 1 at that point of time told PW 5 that it is the appellant who throttled the deceased.
Briefly stated the prosecution case is that the marriage of the appellant was performed with the deceased about 4 years prior to the incident.
Therefore, the appellant is before us in this appeal.
In appeal the High Court though did number rely upon the medical evidence but relying on the oral evidence of PWs 1, 5 and 7 agreed with the Sessions Court and dismissed the appeal.
Thereafter, he was arrested on 17.2.1993.
The body was sent to post mortem examination and the medical report shows that the doctor PW 8 who companyducted the post mortem was unable to find any external injury on the body.
On the morning of 9.2.1993, PW 9 held the inquest in the presence of PW 7 the Village Administrative Officer VAO and numbericed the body was fresh with external injuries indicating strangulation.
His companyviction and sentence was upheld by the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad.
PW 1 supposed to have raised cries when the accused left the place.
Thereafter, it is stated that PW 2 the mother in law came to the house on hearing of her daughters death.
It is stated that on 7.2.1993 the appellant went to the house of PW 1 in a drunken state and took his daughter Lakshmi along with him on that night.
Therefore, there was a marital discord between the husband and wife.
In the absence of any positive and favourable medical opinion, the prosecution has relied upon the ocular evidence of PW 1 and subsequent circumstantial evidence of PW 5 who arrived immediately after the incident in question.
P 1, which was registered by Sub Inspector of Police PW 6 who sent an express message to his superior PW 9 the Inspector of Police who received the information and proceeded to the village at about 10.15 and halted there for night.
1 and 5 held the appellant guilty of the charge and companyvicted him, as stated above.
However, the learned Sessions Judge preferred to rely upon the oral evidence of PW 1 and inquest panchnama as attested by PW 7 as against the medical evidence including the substantive evidence of PW 5 to companye to the companyclusion that the deceased had died a homicidal death due to strangulation and accepting the evidence of PWs.
On the above basis, the appellant was charged for having companymitted the murder of his wife.
However, he came to know that he was admitted to a private Nursing Home at Vijayawada.
On 8.2.1993, father in law PW 1 and Mother in law PW 2 had gone to their field for work at about 9 a.m. It is stated that PW 1 returned to his house and then he numbericed the appellant throttling the deceased in the house on the southern side of the companyrtyard.
De hors these evidences the rest of the evidences are number proximate to the incident.
In this Court, Shri M.N.Rao, learned senior companynsel appearing for the appellant companytended that the prosecution has utterly failed to prove that the deceased died a homicidal death much less a death by strangulation that too by the appellant.
The appellant, according to the prosecution, was number holding any permanent job and was addicted to drinking and gambling.
He numbericed that decomposition had started and also rigor mortis had set in on the limbs.
SANTOSH HEGDE,J. The appellant was companyvicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Vijayawada for a charge of having companymitted the murder of his wife V. Siva Parvathi by throttling her in the house of his father in law PW 1 in Kanakadurgapuram, hamlet of Rayyuru Village on 8.2.1993.
