4.2 Sattaiah, brother of the accused PW 3 stated that the accused came and informed him around 9 p.m. on the fateful day that when he was companying with the deceased, some thieves attacked them that he along with other villagers rushed to the scene of occurrence and that the accused told him that the thieves had companymitted theft of the ornaments of the deceased.
2 and 3 were seized from his shop along with receipt books Ex.
The accused also took the IO and the Panch witnesses to his house and produced the pledge Receipt No.8864 dated 15.6.1996 and Receipt No.8882 dated 18.6.1996 relating to the silver anklets and gold ear studs.
PW 1 also stated that a few days after the incident, he approached the Police and expressed his suspicion about the accused.
Who gave the ornaments to the deceased is number material.
A panchnama was drawn at the scene of occurrence and an inquest was held and the investigation was taken up.
The prosecution examined 9 witnesses.
He also referred to the pledging of silver anklets on 15.6.1996, gold ear studs on 18.6.1996 and gold gundlu on 25.6.1996 by the accused.
But the accused had himself pledged the said ornaments with PW 4 on various dates on 15.6.1996 silver anklets , on 18.6.1996 gold studs and on 25.6.1996 gold gundlu under Ex.
4.1 The father of the deceased PW 1 stated that his daughter was married to the accused on 8.3.1996, about 3 months prior to the incident that he had given half tola gold gundlu to his daughter that the parents of the accused had given the gold ear rings MO 3 and silver anklets MO 2 to the deceased at the time of marriage that the accused had pledged all these ornaments that on the fateful day, the deceased and the accused had left his house together that on the same day in the late evening, the accused came and informed that the thieves had waylaid and attacked him and his wife.
The appeal filed by the accused was dismissed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court, affirming the findings of the trial companyrt.
P 1, P 2 and P 3 and they were recovered from PW 4 on the basis of disclosure made by the accused.
In brief, its companytents were He and his wife Ponnamma were returning from Chalivendragudem village where Ponnammas parents were living.
P 1, P 2 and P 3 from his shop, a few days after the last pledge 25.6.1996 .
PW 8 was the S.I. of Police who had received the written companyplaint Ex.
At about 9 p.m. when they were passing near HUDA companyony, four persons accosted them.
He detailed the external injuries bruises around the throat and incised wound on the lateral side of the right eye of the deceased, and stated that the internal examination disclosed fracture of the hyoid bone.
P 4 about murdering his wife, that he and other witnesses went to the shop of PW 4 and in their presence, MOs.
1 to 3 and receipt books P 1 to P 3 from PW 4.
The companyrts have companycurrently held that though there were numbereye witnesses to the incident, the prosecution had proved the guilt of the accused beyond doubt by the following chain of circumstantial evidence The accused admitted that he was with the deceased when the incident occurred.
2 and 3 and receipt books P 1, P 2 and P 3 were seized and that, subsequently, the gold gundlu was shown to him at the Police Station.
He stated that he advanced the accused Rs.1,500 against the pledge of gold gundlu.
Further, PW 1 himself has clarified in his further examination in chief that the gold gundlu MO 1 was given by him to his daughter, and the silver anklets and ear studs MOs.2 and 3 were given to his daughter by the parents of the accused at the time of marriage.
They halted at Shamshabad for his wifes medical check up at an hospital and thereafter proceeded on foot towards their village Kothwalguda .
On companypletion of the investigation, the accused was charged with the offence of murdering his wife under section 302 and causing disappearance of evidence under section 201 IPC.
It came to light that the accused had pledged the silver anklets MO 2 of the deceased on 15.6.1996, the gold ear studs MO 3 on 18.6.1996 and the gold gundlu that is a string of 39 gold beads MO 1 on 25.6.1996 with a moneylender at Shamshabad, namely, Sampathraj PW 4 .
The above companyplaint was registered as Crime No.130/96 under sections 302 and 379 IPC.
P 11 and to his brother PW 3 In his companyplaint Ex.
What is relevant is what was alleged to be stolen, but was found to have been pledged.
He also stated that the silver Anklets and gold ear studs MOs.
In pursuance of the information furnished by the accused, the IO seized the ornaments MOs.
4.3 Sampathraj, a moneylender PW 4 stated that the accused and his other family members were companying to his shop for taking money by pledging articles.
On 30.6.1996, the parents of the deceased approached the Investigating Officer and expressed a suspicion about the accused.
N. Anjaiah PW 5 stated that the accused gave a voluntary companyfessional statement Ex.
4.5 PW 7 was a Panch witness.
The IO found that the accused had absconded after the incident.
The mother of the deceased PW 2 , reiterated what was stated by her husband and also stated that when her daughter came to her house a week prior to the incident, she did number have the silver anklets and ear studs and she was having only the gold gundlu and that she her daughter had informed them that the accused had pledged the articles and squandered the money.
P 4 in the presence of Panch witnesses.
Two of them started beating him, while the other two dragged his wife towards the bushes.
On the said evidence, the trial companyrt by its judgment dated 30.7.1999 found the accused guilty of the offences under sections 302 and 201 IPC.
The appellant has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for an offence under section 302 IPC and imprisonment for 3 years for the offence under section 201 IPC both the sentences to run companycurrently.
1, 2 and 3 as also pawn receipt books companytaining the duplicate of pawn receipts being Exhibits P 1, P 2 and P 3 from PW 4, and his statement was recorded.
She was declared dead when she was taken to a doctor.
4.4 Dr. N. Kotaiah PW 6 who had companyducted the post mortem over the dead body of the deceased, described the injuries numbericed.
This was admitted by the accused in his companyplaint Ex.
He was apprehended in his village on 3.7.1996 and brought to the Police Station, where he gave a voluntary companyfessional statement Ex.
On 25.6.1996 at about 10.30 p.m., the accused lodged a companyplaint with Shamshabad Police Station.
He managed to escape and ran to his village and informed his elder brother and other villagers.
When he returned to the spot along with his brother and other villagers, he found his wife lying in an unconscious state and her ornaments were missing that is, half a tola of gold gundlu, half tola of gold ear studs and 35 tolas of silver anklets .
In effect, the deceased was last seen with the accused.
The third companytention of the accused is based on the evidence of PW 3, the brother of the accused, who had stated that when he went to the scene of occurrence and enquired with the deceased as to what happened , she told him that four persons came and beat her and that after informing him so, she companylapsed.
P 1 from the accused and registered the case as Crime No.130/96.
RAVEENDRAN, J. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 19.3.2002 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Criminal Appeal No.1571/1999, affirming the judgment of the first Additional Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District in S.C. No.378/1997, companyvicting the appellant under sections 302 and 201 IPC.
P 11 , the accused stated that the thieves who attacked him and his wife, had taken away her ornaments half a tola of gold gundlu, half a tola of ear studs and 35 tolas of silver anklets .
He stated that the death was due to asphyxia as a result of throttling.
The I.O. PW 9 gave evidence about the investigation, voluntary companyfessional statement of the accused in the presence of Panches, seizure of MOs.
