Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

19. Keeping in view the above settled legal position in mind, now I would venture to analyze the evidence on record. PW.1 is the father of the deceased. He deposed that the marriage of the deceased was performed with PW.8. He was at Hyderabad on the date of death of the deceased. His brother informed him over telephone about the death of his daughter and he came from Hyderabad to her daughter's in-laws house and found that the deceased was hanging in the house of PW.8 with rope to her neck. Due to the teasing and harassment of the petitioner/accused, the deceased died by committing suicide by self strangulation. One month prior to the incident, the deceased informed him about the teasing of the petitioner/accused. PW.1 was cross 11 Justice Juvvadi Sridevi examined at length, wherein, it was elicited that neither himself nor his son-in-law (PW.8) lodge any complaint with the police with regard to the teasing of the petitioner/accused. Ex.P1 is the complaint lodged by PW.1, wherein, it was stated that the petitioner/accused was harassing the deceased for the past three months. However, in the evidence of PW.1, he deposed that the deceased informed him about the teasing and harassment of the petitioner/accused one month prior to the incident. He further deposed that he informed the parents of the petitioner/accused about the harassment in the presence of elders, i.e., Konkali Krishnaiah and Chandu. However, both the said persons were not examined by the prosecution.

12 Justice Juvvadi Sridevi

21. PW.3 is mother of the husband of the deceased. She deposed in her evidence that the deceased informed her on Tuesday that the petitioner/accused was following her and teasing her and on the next day, while she went to shop, the deceased self strangulated and died. In her cross-examination, PW.3 admitted that after the tenth day ceremony of the deceased, their family returned an amount of Rs.34,000/- apart from gold ornaments to the parents of the deceased.

22. PW.4 deposed that he knows PWs.1 to 3 and the petitioner/accused, who are the residents of his village. He deposed that on hearing noise from the house of PW.3, he along with LW5 went there and found that the door was bolted from inside. They broke open the door and found that the deceased died by self strangulation. He categorically deposed that he do not know the reason as to why the deceased committed suicide by self strangulation.

23. PW.5 deposed on the same line as of PW.4. He also categorically deposed that he do not know the reason as to why the deceased committed suicide by self strangulation. PW.6 is the photographer, who took photographs of the deceased.

24. PW.7 is the uncle of the deceased. He deposed that neither the petitioner/accused nor his family were questioned about the teasing and harassment of the petitioner/accused. He deposed that after 13 Justice Juvvadi Sridevi twenty days of the death of the deceased, an amount of Rs.34,000/- and gold ornaments were paid by PW.8 to the parents of the deceased. It was suggested to this witness that the deceased came to him and informed that PW.8 wanted to remarry as he did not have any children. It was also suggested to this witness that he beat the deceased and told her to live or die in her in-laws house.