Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 745 (AP)

Neralli Chinna Muthanna Gangadu v. State Of A. P.

2002-06-19

M.NARAYANA REDDY, R.M.BAPAT

body2002
RAMESH MADHAV BAPAT, J. ( 1 ) THE accused/appellant was prosecuted and tried for an offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code by the learned Sessions Judge, Karimnagar in sessions Case No. 642 of 1996. On evidence the learned Judge convicted the accused/ appellant and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life. Aggrievedby the order of conviction and sentence, the accused/ appellant has preferred this appeal. ( 2 ) THE prosecution story can be briefly narrated as follows:accused married a person having three children. However, due to differences of opinion between him and his wife, the wife of the accused was staying separately along with the children deserting the accused- husband. The accused was staying along with his mother, who was aged about 70 years. The accused used to tell his deceased mother to arrange his second marriage. But she did not do so. Therefore, on the date of incident the accused alleged to have throttled the deceased and caused bite injuries on her neck and caused her death. ( 3 ) ON hearing the sounds and commotion, the neighbours came to the house of accused but the door of the accused was bolted from inside. Then the matter was reported to police. On arrival of police, the accused opened the door. All the witnesses and the police found that the accused and deceased were only present inside the house. They also found the fresh injuries around the neck of the deceased. The inquest was conducted and the dead body of the deceased was sent for post-mortem examination. Ultimately on completion of investigation charge-sheet has been filed. ( 4 ) IT appears from the Judgment of the trial court that the trial court appointed an advocate for defence at the cost of State. Mr. G. Vilas Rao was appointed as the defence counsel. When he had gone to the accused for taking instructions, the Advocate was abused in filthy language by the accused. Therefore, the Advocate filed a memo to that effect. Then the learned Sessions Judge secured the presence of accused, framed a charge, to which the accused pleaded guilty of having committed the murder of his mother. The learned Judge did not accept the plea of guilt, and the accused was sent for medical examination. For more than two years the matter underwent several adjournments. Then the learned Sessions Judge secured the presence of accused, framed a charge, to which the accused pleaded guilty of having committed the murder of his mother. The learned Judge did not accept the plea of guilt, and the accused was sent for medical examination. For more than two years the matter underwent several adjournments. Finally the accused was produced before the trial court saying that he was mentally fit to face the trial. Thereupon the trial was proceeded and ultimately on evidence the accused-appellant was convicted and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life. ( 5 ) THE chequered history regarding the mental illness of the accused after the commission of offence has been narrated by the learned Judge in the early paragraphs of the Judgment. It is not necessary for us to repeat the same. It appears to us that the accused might also be insane at the time of commission of offence. Though such defence was not taken by the learned counsel appointed at the cost of State before the trial court, it was simply argued that the accused was mentally not sound at the time of commission of offence. But the learned Judge rejected the said plea on the ground that no such plea was taken earlier at any point of time. ( 6 ) LOOKING at the chequered history of mental illness of accused after the commission of offence, we apprehend that the accused-appellant might be insane even at the time of commission of offence, therefore, we set aside the order of conviction and sentence recorded against the accused- appellant by the learned Sessions Judge and remand the matter to the court of Sessions judge, Karimnagar for fresh disposal, with a direction to send the accused to the Institute of Mental Health once again and seek the opinion of the Doctor as to whether the accused was mentally ill at the time of commission of offence, by giving him the detailed history of the case. However, till the case is disposed of by the learned Sessions judge, the accused shall remain in jail. The defence counsel also can file appropriate petition and examine witnesses, if any, to show that the accused-appellant was not mentally fit when the offence was committed. ( 7 ) WITH these directions, the appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above.