( 1 ) HEARD Sri. G. Balaram, the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. The appellant/accused was found guilty for the offence under Sections 498-A and 306 I. P. C. and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- for the offence under Section 306 IPC, and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and the accused was also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- for the offence under Section 498-A I. P. C. , in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and with a further direction that both the sentences would run concurrently. ( 2 ) THE Sub-Inspector of police, Shankarampet (R) filed charge sheet against the accused in Crime No. 34 of 1994 of Shankarampet Police Station under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC with the following allegations; the deceased Smt. Sardar Begum @ Nazma Begum was given in marriage to the accused about six years back and they were blessed with three children. The accused was unemployed and he was doing private work. For Some period, the accused and his family stayed with Syed Fazuluddin, who is the brother of deceased. Thereafter, they went to their native place and there the accused could not look after his family welfare and used to harass the deceased to bring money from her parents house, due to which she used to visit her brother and used to take money. About six months back, the accused picked up a quarrel with the deceased. On 28-6-1994 evening, brother of the deceased received a message that his sister died by drowning in an agricultural well. On his enquiry through one Osman Ali, the son of the deceased, he came to know that accused beat the deceased, resulting which she committed suicide by drowning into the well and died. On the basis of the complaint given by the brother of the deceased, a case has been registered, investigated into and filed charge sheet. On his enquiry through one Osman Ali, the son of the deceased, he came to know that accused beat the deceased, resulting which she committed suicide by drowning into the well and died. On the basis of the complaint given by the brother of the deceased, a case has been registered, investigated into and filed charge sheet. ( 3 ) THE learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medak, had taken cognizance of the case against the accused under Sections 498-A and 306 I. P. C. and committed the matter to the Court of Session, which was made over to the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Medak, and the learned Judge after recording the evidence of P. Ws. 1 to 11 and making Exs. P1 to P. 7 arrived at a conclusion that the guilt of the accused as against both the charges under Sections 498-A and 306 I. P. C. had been established. Sri G. Balaram, the learned counsel representing the appellant, would submit that except the evidence of P. W. 1, there is no other evidence available on record and on the strength of the evidence of P. W. 1, the conviction had been recorded, which cannot be sustained. The Counsel also had drawn the attention of this Court to the evidence available on record and would contend that even Ex. P1-complaint given by P. W. 1 shows that as there was some difficulty in pulling on with the life, his brother-in-law was beating his sister for money and his sister used to take some money from them and it is also specific in Ex. P1 that a message was given to P. W. 1 that his sister died by falling into a well. ( 4 ) THE stand taken by the defence is that falling of the deceased into the well may be just by accident. P. W. 1, no doubt, deposed that the accused is his brother-in-law and his deceased sisters marriage was celebrated with the accused in the year 1989 and in the marriage they had given money, clothes and after the marriage, the accused ill-treated and harassed his sister and his sister used to stay in their house and she stayed in their house up to three years. P. W. 1 further deposed that the accused involved in liquor cases and in that cases, he was fined and that fine amount was also paid by P. W. 1 and the accused used to harass his sister for the sake of money and to bring money from her parents and they used to pay some amount every month to accused to avoid the harassment meted out by his deceased sister in the hands of the accused. Since the deceased had no parents and the accused was not feeding his children properly, P. W. 1 used to feed them and after the death of the deceased also, children of the accused are staying with them and P. W. 1 is maintaining them. He further deposed that the death of the deceased was informed by one Sarvar Pasha, Ex-Sarpanch of Kondapur Village and they rushed to the house of the accused and Ex. P. 1 was the complaint given by him. This witness was cross-examined at length. It was specifically suggested to P. W. 1 that the deceased died due to slip of leg into the well while washing clothes. But, this was specifically denied. ( 5 ) P. W. 2 was declared hostile. P. W. 3 simply deposed that he know the accused person and he saw the deceased going along with a plastic water mug towards fields at about 9-00 A. M. , when he was going to Medak and he come to know that the deceased died by drowning into the well. P. W. 4 simply deposed that about three years back at 6-00 A. M. , he came to know that the wife of the accused died by drowning into the well and this witness along with one K. Pentaiah and other villagers went to Balareddys agricultural well and he had seen the slippers and tumbler on the bank of the well and they tried to lift the body from the well, but they could not succeed and again they tried and lifted the body with the help of hook, which is used for lifting the articles from the well. P. W. 5 is an illiterate person, who was examined in relation to Ex. P. 3. No doubt, he deposed that Ex. P. 3 bears his thumb impression, but he again deposed that he does not know the contends of Ex. P3 being an illiterate person. P. W. 5 is an illiterate person, who was examined in relation to Ex. P. 3. No doubt, he deposed that Ex. P. 3 bears his thumb impression, but he again deposed that he does not know the contends of Ex. P3 being an illiterate person. The evidence of P. Ws. 6 and 7 is general in nature. P. W. 8 deposed that about two years back at 4-00 p. m. , police called him to act as a panch witness for inquest and he had seen the dead body and found no external injuries on the dead body and he does not know the reason as to how she died. ( 6 ) P. W. 9 is the Deputy Tahsildar, who had conducted the inquest panchanama over the dead body of the deceased and he had deposed about securing three panchas and also deposed about Ex. P3-panchanama drafted by M. R. I. on his dictation. P. W. 10 is the doctor, who deposed that on receiving requisition from M. R. O. , he conducted autopsy over the dead body and found the following injuries; the body was in highly decomposed condition face was black bloted, colour of the hair was black, 1 feet in length over the head and to be easily pulled off from the head, tongue was swollen precluding out of mouth, cutical was pealed off at places over the abdomen chest upper links and thighs. Rigor mortis was passed off from the body. There were no external or internal injury found over the body. Approximate time of death 3 to 4 days prior to conducting of autopsy. ( 7 ) THIS witness also deposed that he had preserved the viscera for the presence of any poison and preserved the peace of sternum for the presence of identical diotem and he had sent the viscera to Forensic Science Laboratory (F. S. L.) and the F. S. L. report reveals that no substance found in the viscera and there was no identical diotems present in sternum and he had issued final opinion on 18-11-1994 stating that no opinion of cause of death of the deceased can be given. Ex. P. 4 is the postmortem examination report, Ex. P. 5 is the F. S. L. report and Ex. P. 6 is the Final report. Ex. P. 4 is the postmortem examination report, Ex. P. 5 is the F. S. L. report and Ex. P. 6 is the Final report. P. W. 11 is the Head Constable, who had registered the case, sent the F. I. R.-Ex. P. 7 to the Court, recorded the statements of the witnesses and arrested the accused and produced him before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medak. Inasmuch as certain witnesses were declared hostile. The statement alleged to have been made by these witnesses before the Police had been put to them. On the strength of this evidence, the learned Judge recorded findings and ultimately came to the conclusion that the guilt of the accused had been proved beyond all reasonable doubt for the charges under Sections 498-A and 306 I. P. C. ( 8 ) RELIANCE was placed on Darya Singh v. State of Punjab ( AIR 1965 SC 328 ) by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and a contention was advanced that no corroboration is necessary for the evidence of P. W. 1 and on the strength of the evidence of P. W. 1, conviction can be sustained. Strong reliance was also placed on the decision of a Division Bench of this court reported in Wadde Janardhan v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1999 (2) ALT (Crl.) 434 (DB)) for the purpose of substantiating his contention that the presumption under Section 113 (A) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, is attracted since the married woman committed suicide within seven years of her marriage in the present case. ( 9 ) THERE cannot be any controversy about the proposition of law, which had been canvassed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. But the question, which may have to decided is whether on the evidence available on record, the guilt of the accused under Sections 498-A and 306 I. P. C. had been proved beyond all reasonable doubt or not. Except the testimony of P. W. 1 who deposed that he had collected some information through some beggars, none others had been examined in relation to the harassment meted out to the deceased, either the events, which are pre-incident or post-incident events, or at least, the events, which had happened on the fateful day. Thus, absolutely, there is no evidence in this regard. Thus, absolutely, there is no evidence in this regard. A presumption may be drawn if some acceptable evidence is available on record, but the evidence of P. W. 1 also is very vague. In Ex. P. 1, PW. 1 alleges about the harassment, but the details had not been given. May be that the accused was not an earning member and he might have been facing some financial problems in maintaining the family, but by that itself, it cannot be said that the offence under Section 498-A I. P. C. had been established. It is needless to say that when there is no clear evidence relating to either harassment or cruelty satisfying the ingredients of Section 498-A I. P. C. , definitely, it cannot be said that the offence under Section 498-A I. P. C. had been established, especially in the absence of any convincing evidence of any witness whatsoever. The brother of the deceased just deposed that they were parting with certain amount because of the certain harassment meted by the husband of the deceased and nothing more or nothing beyond. On the strength of such evidence of P. W. 1, this Court is of the considered opinion that it would be very difficult to sustain the findings and also the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Judge and accordingly, the conviction and sentence are hereby set aside on both the charges and acquittal is hereby recorded. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the bail bonds of the appellant shall stand cancelled.