JUDGEMENT
Ananthanayayana Ayyar, J. -
(1.)In Sessions Case No. 23 of 1962, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Srikakulam framed a single charge against the sole accused, Padala Suryanarayana, viz., that in the night of 30-4-1962 at Tumarada, accused murdered his wife, Uttara. The accused pleaded "Not Guilty" to the charge. After trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Srikakulam, convicted the accused of the offence with which he was charged and sentenced him to imprisonment for life. The accused filed this appeal against the conviction and sentence.
(2.)The prosecution case, supported by 17 witnesses, is to the following effect. P. W. 17 a ryot of Tampatapalli, who had two wives and a concubine (P. W. 3). Through P. W. 3, he had three daughters. One of them named Uttara (deceased) was given as 2nd wife to the accused who was a driver employed in a rice mill in Tumarada village belonging to the local Village Munsif (P. W. 7). Accused had, at Tumarada, a house which belonged to his first wife. Another daughter of P. W. 2 was Saraswati, who was given in marriage to P.W. 1. The accused had three children by the deceased. He lived with the deceased and the children in a house at Tampatapalli along with P. W. 1 and P. W. 3. In the later part of April 1962, he ran away to Tekkali and P. W. 2 and P. W. 7 went in search of the accused. But ultimately accused himself returned and explained to P. W. 2, when questioned by the latter, that he had gone away because his mind was not alright. A few days later, the accused went away with the deceased and his children to his house in Tumarada and took up residence there.
(3.)P. W. 2 went to Tumarada and visited the accused and the deceased at about 5-00 P. M. on the day of the occurrence viz., 30-4-1962. P. W. 2 asked the accused why the latter moved away from P. W. 3s house in his absence and the accused told him that his health was not alright and that he was developing some fear in remain for the night, but the accused asked him to go away and send P. W. 1. Accordingly P. W. 2 sent P. W. 1 and the latter arrived at the house of the accused at about 8-00 p. m. By that time, the accused and his family had finished their night meal. P. W. 1 ate food served to him by the deceased and later the whole lot lay down to sleep in the front verandah. In the same verandah, P. Ws. 4 and 5 (neighbours) were also sleeping. It was a dark night.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.