Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 818 (AP)

Ranganath, Anantapur Dt & 3 v. State Of Ap Rep Pp

2024-07-24

K.SREENIVASA REDDY, K.SURESH REDDY

body2024
JUDGMENT : (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.Suresh Reddy) All the four appellants/Accused in Sessions Case No.306 of 2015 on the file of the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Hindupur, Ananthapur District, have filed the present Criminal Appeal. They were tried and convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge under Section 302 read with 34 IPC and they were sentenced to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for “LIFE” each and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each in default to suffer Simple Imprisonment for a period of six (06) months. The total fine amount of Rs.4,000/- was directed to be paid to Pw-1 after the Appeal time is over. 2. Substance of the charge is that on 04.02.2024 at about 12.00 Noon, Accused Nos.1 to 4 with a common intention picked up a quarrel with one Smt. Harijana Lakshmakka (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”) caught hold of her tuft, dragged her and beat her with hands and legs and in the same process Accused No.2 poured kerosene on her and Accused No.1 set her to fire with a match stick causing her death, thereby committed offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 IPC. 3. Case of the prosecution, as per the evidence of prosecution witnesses is as follows:- All the four accused and the material prosecution witnesses are residents of SC colony, Kallumarri Village, Madakasira Mandal, Ananthapur District. The deceased was also resident of same Village and she is a neighbour to the accused. The marriage of the deceased was performed with one Nagaraju of Muddireddipalli Village of Parigi Mandal about ten (10) years prior to the incident. Due to some disputes, the husband of the deceased discarded her about two (02) years prior to the incident. Since then, she has been residing in the house of her elder sister-Pw-1. There is a public drain infront of the house of Pw-1 and the accused. As the dirty water was coming infront of her house, the deceased used to lay soil across the drain to prevent free flow of drainage water infront of her house. In that connection, Accused Nos.1 to 4 indulged in quarrelling with the deceased for obstructing the drainage water. On 03.02.2014 at about 7.00 A.M, when the deceased laid soil across the drain, Accused Nos.1 to 4 picked up a quarrel with her, abused her and beat her with hands and legs. In that connection, Accused Nos.1 to 4 indulged in quarrelling with the deceased for obstructing the drainage water. On 03.02.2014 at about 7.00 A.M, when the deceased laid soil across the drain, Accused Nos.1 to 4 picked up a quarrel with her, abused her and beat her with hands and legs. On the next day i.e., 04.02.2014 at about 12.00 Noon also, the deceased laid soil across the drain. Then, Accused Nos.1 to 4 came there and picked up quarrel with her and caught hold of her tuft, dragged her and beat her with hands and legs. Accused Nos.2 and 4 raised cries stating “Kill the deceased”. Then, Accused No.2 picked up kerosene can and poured kerosene on the deceased and Accused No.1 set fire to her with a match stick. The deceased raised hue and cries. Then Pws-1 to 3 came to the scene of offence and put off the flames. Thereafter, Pw-1 telephoned to 108 Ambulance, in which the deceased was shifted to Government Hospital, Hindupur where she was admitted. On the same day, at about 1.00 P.M, Pw-13- Head Constable, I Town Police Station, Hindupur received intimation Ex.P-14 from the hospital. Immediately, he went to the hospital and recorded statement from injured under Ex.P-15. He sent both Exs.P-14 and 15 to Madakasira Police Station on the point of jurisdiction. 4. Pw-14-Sub-Inspector of Police, Madakasira Police Station received Exs.P-14 and 15 at about 9.00 P.M and registered a case in Cr.No.18 of 2014 under Section 307 read with 34 IPC and issued copies of FIRs to all the concerned. Copy of FIR was marked as Ex.P-18. Having received intimation from the Government Hospital, Pw-6-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Hindupur went to the hospital and recorded statement from the injured, which was marked as Ex.P-4. At about 10.00 P.M, Pw-14 visited the Government Hospital and recorded statement from the injured and also recorded statements of Pws-1 to 3. On 05.02.2014, he went to the scene of offence and recorded statement of Pw-4. He also prepared observation report- Ex.P-19 and also prepared rough sketch-Ex.P-22 at the scene of offence. He seized M.Os-1 to 3 at the scene of offence. While undergoing treatment, the deceased succumbed to the injuries. On 06.02.2014 at about 8.30 A.M, Pw-14 received death intimation and altered the Section of law from 307 to 302 IPC. Altered FIR was marked as Ex.P-20. He seized M.Os-1 to 3 at the scene of offence. While undergoing treatment, the deceased succumbed to the injuries. On 06.02.2014 at about 8.30 A.M, Pw-14 received death intimation and altered the Section of law from 307 to 302 IPC. Altered FIR was marked as Ex.P-20. On the same day, at about 9.30 A.M, Pw-15- Inspector of Police, Madakasira Police Station received copy of FIR and proceeded to Government Hospital. He recorded statements of Pws-1 to 6. Thereafter, he held inquest over the dead body in the presence of mediators under Ex.P-1. He sent the dead body for Post-Mortem examination. On the same day, Pw-9-Civil Assistant Surgeon conducted autopsy over the dead body. He opined the cause of death was due to “multi organ failure, secondary to extensive burns”. He issued Post-Mortem certificate -Ex.P-10. On 21.02.2014, at about 12.30 P.M, Accused Nos.1 to 3 were produced by one C. Venkata Siva Reddy, V.R.O, Kallumarri Panchayat before Pw-15 along with written report stating that they have confessed before him. He arrested all the three accused under a panchanama-Ex.P-24, who were remanded to judicial custody. So far as Accused No.4 is concerned, she obtained anticipatory bail. After receipt of Post-Mortem certificate, he filed charge sheet. 5. In support of its case, the prosecution examined Pws-1 to 15 and marked Exs.P-1 to 24 and also exhibited M.Os-1 to 3. 6. When the accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., they denied the incriminating material found against them. 7. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 8. The learned counsel for the appellants contended that the evidence of Pws-1 to 3 is not at all reliable and they are closely related to the deceased. So far as Pws-4, 5, 7 and 8 are concerned, they did not support the prosecution case. So far as dying declarations, which were marked as Exs.P-4 and 15, are concerned, they cannot be relied on. The learned counsel for the appellants further states that it is a case of suicide and not a case of homicide. Having committed suicide, the deceased deliberately implicated all the four accused in a false case. As such, the learned counsel for the appellants requested this Court to allow the Appeal by setting aside the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. 9. Having committed suicide, the deceased deliberately implicated all the four accused in a false case. As such, the learned counsel for the appellants requested this Court to allow the Appeal by setting aside the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. 9. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the Appeal contending inter alia that there is nothing to doubt about the dying declaration-Ex.P-4 recorded by the learned Magistrate- Pw-6. Another dying declaration-Ex.P-15 recorded by Pw-13 is also in conformity with Ex.P-4. There are no variations in both the dying declarations. Apart from Exs.P-4 and 15, the oral evidence of Pws-1 to 3 also support the case of prosecution. As such, he sought for dismissal of Appeal. 10. We have gone through the entire material on record. 11. At the first instance, we intend to discuss the evidence of Pws-1 to 3. PW-1 is none other than the sister of the deceased. In her evidence she categorically stated that the deceased used to live with her as she got separated from her husband. The evidence of Pw-1 further show that on 03.02.2014 at about 7.00 A.M, an altercation took place between the accused and the deceased with regard to obstructing the drainage water infront of their house. Her evidence further goes to show that on 04.02.2014 also at about 7.00 A.M, there was a quarrel between the accused and the deceased. In that quarrel, the accused caught hold of her tuft and beat her indiscriminately with hands and legs. Immediately, they poured kerosene on the deceased and set fire to her with a match stick. Hearing the cries of the deceased, she along with Pws-2 and 3 came out and put off the flames and shifted her to hospital and got admitted by 12.00 P.M. In the crossexamination, Pw-1 at one stage stated that she was present at the time of incident and she witnessed the incident. At another point, she stated that she was not present at the scene of offence at the relevant point of time. 12. Coming to the evidence of Pw-2, he is none other than the father of the deceased. In his evidence, he stated that after hearing the cries of the deceased, he rushed to the spot and put off the flames. By that time, Pws-1 and 3 were also present at the scene of offence. 12. Coming to the evidence of Pw-2, he is none other than the father of the deceased. In his evidence, he stated that after hearing the cries of the deceased, he rushed to the spot and put off the flames. By that time, Pws-1 and 3 were also present at the scene of offence. Immediately, they have shifted the injured to the hospital in 108 ambulance. A close scrutiny of the evidence of Pw-2 would show that he is not an eye witness to the incident and he came to the scene after hearing the cries of the deceased, by that time Pws-1 and 3 were already present. 13. Coming to the evidence of Pw-3, she is none other than mother of the deceased. In her evidence she also stated in the same lines as that of Pw-1. But, she stated that the alleged incident took place at about 12.00 Noon. As such, there is any amount of inconsistency in the evidence of Pws-1 to 3. Further, it is suggested to all the three witnesses in the cross examination that as the deceased committed suicide and the prosecution party demanded an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- from the accused and as they did not fulfil their demand, they deposed against the accused. Pws-1 to 3 have come up with the present version for the first time during the course of trial. In the inquest report- Ex.P-21 the stand of Pws-1 to 3 was altogether different. In column No.15 of the inquest repot-Ex.P-21, Pws-1 to 3 have stated that on 04.02.2014 at about 12.00 Noon all the four accused beat the deceased indiscriminately and having felt insulted, the deceased went into the house and poured kerosene on her and came out of the house and set fire to herself and thereafter, Pws-1 to 3 put off the flames and shifted her in 108 ambulance. For better appreciation of the case, the stand of Pws-1 to 3 in the inquest report-Ex.P-21 is extracted hereunder:- “But as per the opinion of the elders and blood relatives shown in column No.1(b), there was a galata in between the deceased Lakshmakka, on one side and Santhamma, Ranganath, Muddappa and Rajamma on the other side in connection with drainage water. On 03.02.2014 at about 7.00 A.M the above said four persons picked up quarrel with the deceased Lakshmakka and beat her indiscriminately and that again on 04.02.2014 at about 12.00 Noon, the above said four persons picked up quarrel with the deceased Lakshmakka, beat her with hands and legs. Being ashamed of it, she went into her house stating that she will die and will look after you, so saying went into her house, poured kerosene on herself, came out of the house and lit fire, raised cries, and then the neighbours and Pws-1 to 3 came there and put off the flames, telephoned to 108 ambulance and shifted the injured (deceased) to Government Hospital, Hindupur and got admitted her in the hospital, and on 06.02.2014 at about 7.00 A.M, the deceased died while undergoing treatment for the burn injuries”. 14. Admittedly, the incident took place on 04.02.2014. The Investigating Officer-Pw-14 recorded statements of Pws-1 to 3 on the same day itself. Admittedly, the deceased succumbed to the injuries on 06.02.2014 and the inquest was conducted at about 11.00 A.M on 06.02.2014. Even at the time of inquest, the version of Pws-1 to 3 was the deceased committed suicide. It is also their version that before committing suicide, the deceased threatened the accused stating that “I will see your end, by ending my life”. 15. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the belated version of Pws-1 to 3, who are highly interested witnesses, cannot be relied on, as their earlier version was the deceased committed suicide by pouring kerosene on herself. 16. Coming to the dying declarations-Exs.P-4 and 15 though the deceased has stated that the accused poured kerosene and set fire to her with a match stick, but in Ex.P-4, the deceased has stated that the incident took place at about 10.30 A.M. In Ex.P-4, the deceased further stated that all the accused poured kerosene and set fire to her. She did not specify as to who poured kerosene and who set fire to her. In Ex.P-4, the deceased further stated that the accused themselves telephoned to 108 ambulance and they accompanied her to the hospital. 17. In Ex.P-15 recorded by Pw-13, the deceased has stated that the incident took place at about 12.00 Noon. In Ex.P-15 the deceased did not state as to who poured kerosene on her and who set fire to her. In Ex.P-4, the deceased further stated that the accused themselves telephoned to 108 ambulance and they accompanied her to the hospital. 17. In Ex.P-15 recorded by Pw-13, the deceased has stated that the incident took place at about 12.00 Noon. In Ex.P-15 the deceased did not state as to who poured kerosene on her and who set fire to her. In Ex.P-15, the deceased has stated that neighbours called 108 ambulance and Pw-1 shifted her in ambulance to Government Hospital. Having carefully scrutinised both these dying declarations, we have no hesitation to hold that both these dying declarations are suffering from inconsistencies and they do not inspire confidence of this Court. As seen from Ex.P-21 inquest report, the initial version of Pws-1 to 3 was that the deceased committed suicide by pouring kerosene and setting fire to herself. The dying declarations-Exs.P-4 and 15 also do not inspire the confidence of this Court, in view of the earlier statements of Pws-1 to 3, which were recorded in the inquest report-Ex.P-21. As such, the learned Additional Sessions Judge ought not to have placed any reliance on both these dying declarations as they are suffering from inconsistencies and they do not inspire confidence of this Court. 18. In view of the facts and circumstances, we have no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the appellants/Accused Nos.1 to 4 beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, we are inclined to allow the Criminal Appeal by setting aside the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. 19. In the result, the Criminal Appeal is allowed by setting aside the conviction and sentence recorded against the appellants/Accused Nos.1 to 4 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hindupur, vide S.C.No.306 of 2015, dated 23.09.2015. 20. The appellants/Accused Nos.1 to 4 shall be set at liberty forthwith, if they are not required to be detained in any other case or crime. Fine amount, if any paid by them, shall be refunded to them. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.