Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 1074 (AP)

Pulagam Srinivas Reddy v. State of A. P.

2013-11-26

RAJA ELANGO

body2013
JUDGMENT Raja. Elango, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the appellant-accused against the judgment dated 27-10-2006 passed by the I Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Sessions Judge for Trial of cases under the S.Cs. and S.Ts. (P.O.A.) Act, East Godavari District, Rajahmundry. The case of the prosecution is as follows: One Kum. Panthagani Naga Rejeswari (for short, 'the deceased') belongs to Scheduled Caste. While she was working as a Nurse in Bollineni Heart Care Centre, the accused was also working as an Assistant lab Technician in Cath Lab in the same hospital. He belongs to Reddy community. The accused and the deceased used to move closely and the accused pretended as if he loved her, and the accused made the deceased to believe by promising that he would marry her. On coming to know about the same, some Doctors of the hospital admonished both of them. In that context, the deceased disclosed to the staff that they loved each other and they wanted to marry. Thus, all the hospital staff and nurses had been under the impression that both of them would get married and it became a subject matter of talk among the staff of the hospital. While so, the deceased asked the accused to marry her, without further delay, for which, the accused revealed that he was not willing to marry her on the ground that she belonged to Scheduled Caste. On realizing that the accused cheated her with an ulterior motive, on 3-5-2005 at about 4.30 p.m., the deceased picked out Pancuromium Bromide Ample and at about 8 p.m., she went to the 2nd floor of the hospital and self injected the said drug with an intention to kill herself, as a result of which she collapsed on the floor. The staff of the hospital noticed the same and reported the matter to P.W. 18 and P.W. 19. They visited the hospital and confirmed that the deceased died. As the deceased did not return home. P.W. 1 father and P.W. 2 brother came to the hospital and on coming to know about the death of the deceased, the mob gathered and damaged the articles of the hospital. On a report given by P.W. 1, a case was registered and investigated into. After completion of the Investigation, charge sheet was filed. 2. P.W. 1 father and P.W. 2 brother came to the hospital and on coming to know about the death of the deceased, the mob gathered and damaged the articles of the hospital. On a report given by P.W. 1, a case was registered and investigated into. After completion of the Investigation, charge sheet was filed. 2. The learned II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Rajahmundry took the case on file and committed the case to the I Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Sessions Judge for Trial of cases under the S.Cs. and S.Ts. (P.O.A.) Act, East Godavari District, Rajahmundry, for disposal. The learned Special Sessions Judge framed charges under Sections 3(1)(x) and 3(2)(v) of the S.Cs. and S.Ts. (P.O.A.) Act (for short, 'the Act') and Sections 504 and 306 IPC against the accused, read over and explained to him in Telugu, for which the pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 3. During the course of trial, P.Ws. 1 to 27 were examined and Exs. P-1 to P-46 besides M.Os. 1 to 4 were marked on behalf of the prosecution. No oral evidence was adduced on behalf of the accused. But a portion in the statement of P.W. 2 recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was marked as Ex. D-1 on his behalf. 4. On appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found the accused guilty for the offence under Section 306 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Act. Accordingly, the trial Court convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of ` 3,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC and further convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of ` 1,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three moths for the offence under Section 3(2)(v) of the Act, However, the appellant-accused was found not guilty for the charges under Section 504 IPC and 3(1)(x) of the S.Cs. and S.Ts. (P.O.A.) Act, 1989. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court, the appellant filed the present appeal. 5. and S.Ts. (P.O.A.) Act, 1989. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court, the appellant filed the present appeal. 5. Learned Counsel for the appellant contended that the trial Court has relied upon the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and there was no evidence to establish the love affair between the accused and the deceased and even P.Ws. 1 and 2, who are father and brother of the deceased, did not speak anything about the affair between the accused and the deceased and there is absolutely no evidence to establish the abetment to commit suicide and the prosecution witnesses failed to establish that the appellant-accused had induced the deceased to end the life by committing suicide and the prosecution miserably failed to establish such inducement. 6. Learned Pubic Prosecutor submitted that the trial Court has appreciated the evidence in a proper perspective and the judgment under appeal needs no interference. 7. There is absolutely no direct evidence on record. The entire case rests upon the Circumstantial evidence. It is to be examined as to whether the circumstantial evidence deposed by the prosecution witnesses points out of the guilt of the accused or not. 8. It is a case where the trial Court without appreciating the evidence in a proper manner and following the legal propositions laid down by the High Courts and the Supreme Court, convicted the accused mainly basing on the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. to support the case of the prosecution. 9. In the present case, P.Ws. 1 and 2, whose are father and brother of the deceased deposed only in connection with unnatural death of the deceased. They have not stated anything regarding the love affair between the deceased and the accused or with regard to any promise made by the accused to the deceased or any inducement made by the accused. The evidence of P.Ws. 1 and 2 is in no way helpful to the case of the prosecution to prove the motive for commission of the offence. P.Ws. 3, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 17, 17, 18 and 23 also did not support the case of the prosecution more particularly regarding the relationship between the deceased and the accused. 10. The only, evidence that is available on record is that of P.W. 19. He deposed that the appellant and the deceased had relationship as close friends. P.Ws. 3, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 17, 17, 18 and 23 also did not support the case of the prosecution more particularly regarding the relationship between the deceased and the accused. 10. The only, evidence that is available on record is that of P.W. 19. He deposed that the appellant and the deceased had relationship as close friends. Except the said evidence, nothing has been stated as to the love affair between the deceased and the accused, or the promise made by the appellant-accused. But the trial Court relying upon Exs. P-2, P-5, P-7, P-8, P-9, P-10, P-12, P15, P-16 and P-42, which are the portions in 161 Cr.P.C. statements of prosecution witnesses, convicted the appellant-accused. 11. It is to be noted that the statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. cannot be considered as that of a substantive evidence. However, they can be used only for the purpose of contradictions during the course of the trial. But, in the instant case, all the witnesses gave a go bye to the entire case of the prosecution. "In those circumstances; the trial Court has resorted to rely upon the 161 Cr.P.C. statements without following the provisions of the Evidence Act and as such, the findings of the trial Court, suffer from illegalities and irregularities. 12. Insofar as the offence under Section 306 IPC is concerned the death should be unnatural and it should be the result of inducement by a person. Further, it should be on record that the deceased has no other alternative except to commit suicide. There should be material evidence, which suggests about the active role, which may be said to have aided in commission of act of suicide. In the instant case, none of the ingredients to attract the offence under Section 306 IPC. are proved by the prosecution. 13. Section 3(2)(v) of the Act reads as follows: commits any offence under the Indian Penal Code punishable with imprisonment for a term of ten years or more against a person or property on the ground that such person is a member of a scheduled caste or a scheduled tribe or such property belongs to such member, shall be punishable with imprisonment for life and with fine. Except the fact that the deceased belongs to scheduled caste, absolutely there is no evidence to attract the ingredients of the said provisions. Except the fact that the deceased belongs to scheduled caste, absolutely there is no evidence to attract the ingredients of the said provisions. For offence under Section 3(2)(v), besides proving ingredients of respective offence, it must further be proved that target of crime was selected on ground that he/she belonged to scheduled caste or scheduled tribe. There is no material on record to establish that the accused abetted the commission of suicide. Therefore, the above provision would not attract to the facts and circumstances of the case. But, the trial Court has failed to consider all these aspects. Apart from that, the trial Court has based its findings on mere surmises and conjectures. Therefore, the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court against the appellant-accused are liable to be set aside. 14. In the result, the Criminal Appeal is allowed setting aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court against the appellant-accused for the offence under Section 306 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the S.Cs. and S.Ts. (P.O.A.) Act. Consequently, he is acquitted for the said charges. Fine amount paid, if any, shall be refunded to the appellant-accused. The bail bonds shall stand cancelled and the sureties, if any, are discharged.