One companytusion over right side of the neck from Thyroid cartilage to right side of cervical spine 10 x 3/4 cm.
P.W. 11.
On the same day, at about 7.55 p.m., P.W. 1 the father of the deceased filed a companyplaint at Karimnagar police station.
The doctor further stated that it was number a case of suicidal death, but a homicidal death.
D 1 and Exh.
He was cross examined by the companynsel appearing for the accused.
The doctor was of the opinion that the possibility of using rope is ruled out and that the injury No.4 is number possible in the case of hanging and that injury No.4 might be possible due to pressure applied either with hand or with legs and the nails can create multiple abrasion.
The Additional Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Karimnagar registered the case as PC No.20/01 and companymitted the same to the Sessions Court, Karimnagar.
It is also alleged that on 07.08.2000 at about 6.00 a.m., PW 8 while companylecting water from the tap called the deceased, but as there was numberresponse, PW 8 went to the portion of the house of the deceased and pushed the door and the door opened and so she entered the house and found the deceased lying on the floor by the side of her bed, and number responding to her calls.
According to P.W. 17, Civil Asstt.
No.15/2000 for offences punishable under Sections 498 A, 302, 304 B IPC.
During holidays, the deceased used to visit the house of PW 1 and PW 2 and informed them about the demand for dowry made by the accused.
Hospital, Karimnagar who companyducted the autopsy over the dead body and issued P.11 M.E.Certificate, the cause of death was due to asphyxia due to throttling.
2 and 3, were examined under Section 313 Cr.
PC wherein they denied their involvement in the offences alleged.
An appeal under Section 37831 Cr.
A chargesheet was filed against the appellant and his father and mother as accused No.
The Sessions Court examined 20 witnesses and the appellant, along with accused Nos.
The case of the prosecution has been extensively dealt with by the High Court in paragraph 5 of its judgment.
Surgeon, Govt.
All the sentences shall run companycurrently.
The short facts are as follows The appellant married Panakanti Kavitha.
He has number elicited anything from him to discredit his evidence in chief and the certificate issued under Exh.
Contusions in front and around the neck Three over left side of neck, extending from upper end of thyroid cartilage to below the left ear 6 cm Extending from Thyroid cartilage to middle of the neck, 7 cm from the cartilage Lower end of Thyroid cartilage to left supra cuavicular region 6 1/2 cm.
He also denied the suggestions that his opinion as to asphyxia due to throttling is incorrect and that it is a case of suicidal hanging.
Contusions both upper arms middle 1/3 10X6 cm left upper arm.
It is also the case of the prosecution that on the date of shifting of the house by the accused at the request of the accused P.W. 1 went to their house where A 1 the appellant herein , in the presence of A 2 and A 3, demanded him to pay the balance of the amount of dowry due and also to provide extra furniture.
Out of the total fine amount of Rs.45,000/ if paid, an amount of Rs.30,000/ shall be paid to PW 2 who is the mother of the deceased as companypensation.
The charge against the appellant accused is that on 06.08.2000, the accused was alleged to have caused the death of the deceased within seven years of marriage by subjecting her to cruelty and harassment for more money.
Therefore, PW 1 gave cash of Rs.70,000/ to A 2 as agreed upon.
On 07.08.2000, the PW 8 pushed the door wing of the house of Accused No.1 and found Panakanti Kavitha lying dead by the side of the company on the ground with injuries in the body.
2 and 3, filed Criminal Appeal Nos.81 and 536 of 2003 under Section 3742 of Cr.
P.C. before the High Court.
The unmarked property number valuable if any shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.
Out of the witnesses examined by the prosecution, P.W.11, 12 and 13 did number support the case of the prosecution and were declared hostile.
It is also alleged that on 06.08.2000, at about 06.08.2000 when P.W. 1 telephoned to PW 10 to know about the welfare of the deceased, P.W. 8 the daughter of PW 10, informed him that A 1 was number in the house and that the deceased is number responding to her call.
Being aggrieved, the appellant, besides accused Nos.
They lived together for three months in a rented house.
According to the accused, he being a medical representative had to leave for Hyderabad on 06.08.2000 itself for official reasons.
The Division Bench has also allowed the appeal filed by the State.
At that time, P.W. 1 gave Rs.10,000/ to A 1 for purchase of extra furniture.
It is the evidence of the doctor that the deceased died on account of asphyxia due to throttling and the approximate time of death was about 30 to 42 hours prior to his post mortem examination.
The defence marked two companytradictions as Exh.
As already numbericed, the prosecution in order to prove its case examined as many as 20 witnesses and got marked PW 1 to PW 21.
The police recorded the statements of PW 3 to PW 6, PW 9, LW 14, PW 12, LW 16, PW 13 and LW 18 on 08.08.2000.
Liver companygested.
Mos.1 to 4 shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.
Multiple minor abrasion over right knee and below the knee patella dislocated.
P. 11 M.E.certificate shows the following injuries Multiple minor abrasions over strnum with medial side of right shoulder.
Stomach companytaining pinkish liquid.
P.C. was also filed being Criminal Appeal No.536 of 2003.
The Division Bench of the High Court, after hearing the parties and after perusing the evidence on record, allowed the criminal appeal as far as accused Nos.2 and 3 are companycerned and dismissed the appeal of the appellant Accused No.1 .
O R D E R Heard Mr. Baijoyonta Barooah, learned companynsel appearing on behalf of the appellant A 1 and Mr.P.Vinay Kumar, learned companynsel appearing on behalf of the respondent.
The same was registered as a case in Cr.
We have also perused the post mortem certificate.
Aggrieved by the same, the appellant Accused No.1 has preferred the present appeal.
We have carefully perused the evidence tendered by P.W. 17 the doctor .
