Santosh Hegde, J. - (1.)The appellant was convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Vijayawada for a charge of having committed 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. His conviction and sentence was upheld by the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad. Therefore, the appellant is before us in this appeal.
(2.)Briefly stated the prosecution case is that the marriage of the appellant was performed with the deceased about 4 years prior to the incident. The appellant, according to the prosecution, was not holding any permanent job and was addicted to drinking and gambling. Therefore, there was a marital discord between the husband and wife. 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. On 8.2.1993, father-in-law (PW-1) and Mother-in-law (PW-2) had gone to their filed for work at bout 9 a.m. It is stated that PW-1 returned to his house and then he noticed the appellant throttling the deceased in the house on the southern side of the courtyard. PW-1 supposed to have raised cries when the accused left the place. Then PW-1 called his neighbour PW-5. She came and attended the deceased and found that the deceased had died by them. PW-1 at that point of time told PW-5 that it is the appellant who throttled the deceased. Thereafter, it is stated that PW-2 the mother-in-law came to the house on hearing of her daughter's death. The first information was lodged only at about 11 p.m. by PW-1, which is marked as Ex. 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. On the morning of 9.2.1993, PW-9 held the inquest in the presence of PW-7 the Village Administrative Officer (VAO) and noticed the body was "fresh" with external injuries indicating strangulation. The body was sent to post-mortem examination and the medical report shows that the doctor (PW-8) who conducted the post-mortem was unable to find any external injury on the body. He noticed that decomposition had started and also rigor mortis had set in on the limbs. He sent the stomach contents as well as the hyoid bone for chemical analyzer and expert's opinion and receive an information from the chemical analyzer that the stomach contents did not contain any poisonous substance and the expert who examined the hyoid bone found that the bone was not fractured or damaged. 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.
(3.)It is stated that the investigating officer was unable to trace the appellant immediately. However, he came to know that he was admitted to a private Nursing Home at Vijayawada. Therefore, his statement was recorded on 13.2.1993. Thereafter, he was arrested on 17.2.1993. On the above basis, the appellant was charged for having committed the murder of his wife.