Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 1369 (AP)

Sadu Chinnarao v. State of A. P. , Rep. PP

2024-09-26

K.SREENIVASA REDDY, K.SURESH REDDY

body2024
JUDGMENT : K. Suresh Reddy, J. Sole accused in Sessions Case No.315 of 2012 on the file of the Court of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kurnool at Adoni (for brevity "learned Additional Sessions Judge"), is the appellant in the present Criminal Appeal. 2. Accused was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge under two (02) charges. First charge was under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity "IPC") and the second charge was under Section 302 IPC. 3. Substance of the charge is that the accused subjected his wife viz. Savaramma (hereinafter referred to, as "the deceased") to cruelty both physically and mentally by beating her and also by abusing her and on the intervening night of 14/15.02.2012 at about 12.30 a.m., he poured kerosene on the deceased and set fire to her in his house situated at Indiranagar, Yemmiganur Town, who died on 24.02.2012 at about 7.40 p.m., while undergoing treatment at the Government Hospital, Yemmiganur, thereby committed the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 302 IPC. 4. After completion of trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the accused for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only), in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of five (05) months. Learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the accused for the offence under Section 498A IPC. 5. Case of the prosecution, briefly, is as follows: The accused and all the material prosecution witnesses are residents of Yemmiganur town. The deceased was also resident of the same town. P.W.1 is the mother, P.W.2 is the son and P.W.3 is the sister, of the deceased, respectively. The marriage of the deceased was performed with one Ganganna about twelve years prior to the date of the incident and the couple blessed with two sons i.e. P.W.2 and another. About nine years prior to the date of the incident, the deceased along with her two sons left the company of Ganganna, due to some differences and she started living with her parents' at Yemmiganur town. About five years prior to the date of the incident, the deceased developed intimacy with the accused, who is a married person and also resident of Yemmiganur town. About five years prior to the date of the incident, the deceased developed intimacy with the accused, who is a married person and also resident of Yemmiganur town. The deceased and the accused, without the notice of family members, got married and started living together, along with her two sons in a rented house at Yemmiganur town. Since one year prior to the date of the incident, the accused started harassing the deceased both physically and mentally. The accused used to beat the deceased frequently. In spite of the same, the deceased continued to live conjugal life with the accused. While so, on 14.02.2012, the sister of the deceased viz. L.W.7/Yerukali Gowri invited the deceased to her house, on the occasion of Puja, as son of L.W.7/Yerukali Gowri was taking “Siva Deeksha”. After taking permission from the accused, the deceased went to the house of her sister (L.W.7/Yerukali Gowri), at about 11.00 a.m., on 14.02.2012. At about 12.00 noon, the accused went to the house of L.W.7 in a drunken state and abused the deceased in filthy language and questioned her as to why she, along with her two sons, went to the house of L.W.7/Yerukali Gowri. Immediately, the deceased along with her two sons and accused returned to their house situated in Indiranagar locality. Even after their return, the accused abused and beat the deceased. The quarrel continued till the evening and the accused went out of the house. At about 12'O clock, in the night, the accused came to the house in drunken condition and again abused and beat the deceased. Thereafter, the accused took out kerosene can, poured the same on the deceased and set fire to her with a matchstick. Having witnessed the incident, son of the deceased, P.W.2 went to the house of P.W.1 and informed the same. In the meanwhile hearing the cries of the deceased, accused poured water and put off the flames. Immediately, the accused shifted the injured to the Community Health Centre, Yemmiganur, for treatment. P.W.6, Civil Assistant Surgeon, Government Hospital, Yemminganur, admitted the deceased in the hospital. He found 70% of burns over the body of the deceased. He also admitted the accused in his hospital, as he was also found 10% of burns on his body. Immediately, he sent Ex.P3-Intimation to the police about the admission of the deceased and the accused. P.W.6, Civil Assistant Surgeon, Government Hospital, Yemminganur, admitted the deceased in the hospital. He found 70% of burns over the body of the deceased. He also admitted the accused in his hospital, as he was also found 10% of burns on his body. Immediately, he sent Ex.P3-Intimation to the police about the admission of the deceased and the accused. Having received Ex.P3-Intimation from the hospital, P.W.8-Sub-Inspector of Police went to the hospital and recorded the statement of the injured/ deceased under Ex.P7. On the basis of Ex.P7-Statement, P.W.8 registered a case in Crime No.28 of 2012 for the offences under Sections 498A and 307 IPC and issued copies of FIR to all the concerned. Ex.P8 is the FIR. At about 4.30 a.m., P.W.8 issued Ex.P10-requisition to the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Yemmiganur. P.W.11-Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Yemmiganur, having received Ex.P10-requisition, went to the Government Hospital and recorded the statement of the injured/deceased under Ex.P12. He also obtained the endorsement of the Doctors under Ex.P12A and Ex.P12B on the Ex.P12-Dying Declaration. While undergoing treatment, the injured succumbed to burn injuries at 7.40 p.m., on 24.02.2012. The hospital authorities sent death intimation under Ex.P4, to the Station House Officer. P.W.9, Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, Yemmiganur Town Police Station, having received Ex.P4-Death Intimation, altered the FIR to Sections 498A and 302 IPC and issued copies of altered FIR. Ex.P11 is the altered FIR. P.W.10, Inspector of Police, Yemmiganur Circle took up investigation and on 25.02.2012, he held inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of mediators P.W.5 and others. Ex.P2 is the Inquest Report. After inquest, he recorded the statements of P.Ws.1, 2 and others at the hospital. He sent a requisition to P.W.7 for conducting Post-Mortem examination. P.W.7/Civil Assistant Surgeon, CHC, Yemmiganur conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased. He opined that the cause of the death is due to shock and secondary infection (Septicaemia). He issued Ex.P6-Post-Mortem Certificate. In the meanwhile, P.W.10 prepared Observation Report under Ex.P10 and rough sketch under Ex.P9, at the scene of offence. On 03.03.2012 at about 8.00 a.m., P.W.10 arrested the accused and he was remanded to judicial custody. After completion of investigation, P.W.10 filed charge sheet. 6. In support of its case, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 11, marked Exs.P1 to P12 and M.Os.1 to 4. On 03.03.2012 at about 8.00 a.m., P.W.10 arrested the accused and he was remanded to judicial custody. After completion of investigation, P.W.10 filed charge sheet. 6. In support of its case, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 11, marked Exs.P1 to P12 and M.Os.1 to 4. On behalf of the defence, Exs.D1 to D4 were marked. 7. When the accused was examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity "CrPC"), he denied the incriminating evidence, brought on record, against him. 8. Accepting the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3 and Exs.P7 and P12, learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the accused, as aforesaid. 9. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State. 10. We have carefully scrutinized the entire evidence brought on record. 11. The evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3 clearly shows that the accused used to harass the deceased both physically and mentally. He also used to beat the deceased frequently. Of course, the learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the accused for the offence under Section 498A IPC, as P.Ws.1 to 3 have not stated as to why the accused used to harass the deceased. 12. Coming to the next evidence available on record, is that the evidence of P.W.2, who is none other than the son of the deceased through her first husband Ganganna. P.W.2 in his evidence has specifically stated that on 14.02.2012 at about 8.00 a.m., he along with his brother and the deceased went to the house of L.W.7/Gowri to attend Puja. At about 12.00 noon, the accused came there and picked up quarrel with the deceased. It is also his evidence that immediately, he along with his brother and the deceased left the house of L.W.7/Gowri and proceeded to their house situated at Indiranagar. Even after returning to home, the accused continued the quarrel with the deceased till evening. 13. P.W.2 further stated that at about 12.00 in the night, accused came in drunken condition, abused the deceased and beat her. He further stated in his evidence that the accused poured kerosene on the deceased and set fire to her. Immediately, P.W.2 went to the house of P.W.1 and informed about the incident. P.W.2 further deposed in his evidence that accused extinguished the flames and shifted the injured to the hospital. 14. He further stated in his evidence that the accused poured kerosene on the deceased and set fire to her. Immediately, P.W.2 went to the house of P.W.1 and informed about the incident. P.W.2 further deposed in his evidence that accused extinguished the flames and shifted the injured to the hospital. 14. The next evidence available on record is two (02) Dying Declarations made by the deceased under Exs.P7 and P12. In both these dying declarations, the deceased had categorically stated that at about 12.00 in the night, the accused came and poured kerosene and set fire to her. The version spoken to, by the deceased in these two (02) dying declarations is consistent. As such, it is the accused, who poured kerosene and set fire to the deceased. The evidence of P.W.2 coupled with Exs.P7 and P12 clinchingly establish that it is the accused, who poured kerosene and set fire to the deceased. 15. Coming to the next evidence, admittedly, according to P.W.1 and dying declarations under Exs.P7 and P12, the accused put-off the flames and shifted the deceased to the Community Health Centre, Yemmiganur. 16. P.W.6, Doctor, who treated both the deceased and the accused, has opined that the deceased received 70% of burns and accused received 10% of burns. As such, it is consistent that the accused shifted the injured to the hospital. 17. Coming to the evidence of P.W.7, who conducted autopsy over the dead body, opined that cause of death was due to shock and secondary infection (Septicaemia). In the cross-examination, P.W.7 has answered the question, as follows : Qus:- Proper management of burns received by Savaramma, could have prevented Septicaemia? Ans:- In primary care centres it is very difficult to prevent the formation of Septicaemia if burns are more than 40%. 18. As per the evidence of P.W.7, if only the injured was given proper treatment, the Septicaemia ought to have been avoided and there is every likelihood of survival of the deceased. As such, cause of death was not solely because of burn injuries, but also due to Septicaemia. As such, the offence would not fall under Section 302 IPC and the offence would fall under Section 304 Part I IPC. In view of the above facts and circumstances, we are inclined to set-aside the conviction passed under Section 302 IPC, instead, convict him for the offence under Section 304 Part I IPC. 19. As such, the offence would not fall under Section 302 IPC and the offence would fall under Section 304 Part I IPC. In view of the above facts and circumstances, we are inclined to set-aside the conviction passed under Section 302 IPC, instead, convict him for the offence under Section 304 Part I IPC. 19. In the result, Criminal Appeal is allowed in part, setting aside the conviction and sentence recorded by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kurnool at Adoni vide Judgment, dated 02.03.2016 in Sessions Case No.315 of 2012. Instead, appellant/ accused is convicted for the offence under Section 304 Part I IPC and he is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven (07) years while maintaining the fine amount. As the appellant/accused is enlarged on bail, by this Court by an Order, dated 07.01.2022, he is directed to surrender before the Central Prison, Cuddapah for serving remaining period of sentence, if any. It is made clear that the period already undergone by the appellant/accused shall be given set-off under Section 428 CrPC. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this criminal appeal, shall stand closed.