Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 999 (AP)

Kolaka Sudhakar v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2024-08-07

K.SREENIVASA REDDY, K.SURESH REDDY

body2024
JUDGMENT : K. SREENIVASA REDDY, J. 1. Sole accused in Sessions Case No. 178 of 2012 on the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srikakulam (hereinafter referred to, as ‘the learned Sessions Judge’) is the appellant in the present Criminal Appeal. The learned Sessions Judge tried the sole accused and convicted of the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity ‘IPC’) and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only), in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six (06) months. 2. The substance of the charge against the accused is that on 06.07.2011 at about 1.30 PM at Tar road situated opposite to Police Station, Kotturu, he caused the death of one Ragolu Tulasi, W/o Sekhar (hereinafter referred to, as ‘the deceased’). 3. Brief facts of the case of prosecution are that, PW-1 is the brother of the deceased. A few months prior to the death of the deceased, the deceased informed PW-1 that the accused, resident of Relliveedhi, was troubling her by talking vulgarly even through phone calls. On 05.07.2011 at about 8.30 PM, PW-1 went to the house of the accused and questioned him about his behaviour towards his sister i.e. the deceased. Accused caught hold of PW-1; so, PW-1 too caught hold of the shirt of the accused and gave him a slap and an argument ensued between both of them. Later, PW-1 left to his house. On that day, PW-1 took the mobile phone of the deceased. At about 11.00 PM on the same day, PW-1 received a phone call to his sister’s mobile; he heard the accused threatening the deceased, stating ‘you made your brother beat me’ and when PW-1 questioned as to who he was, the accused disconnected the call. On the next day, when PW-1 went to work at about 11.30 AM, PW-6 took the deceased to Dr. Atchannaidu Hospital; while they were returning from the hospital, reached in front of police station situated opposite to GMR Complex, accused stabbed the deceased with a knife. On that the deceased fell down and the accused also kicked her. PW-3, Head Constable, Kothuru Police Station, on the date of incident, was discharging duties in the police station. Atchannaidu Hospital; while they were returning from the hospital, reached in front of police station situated opposite to GMR Complex, accused stabbed the deceased with a knife. On that the deceased fell down and the accused also kicked her. PW-3, Head Constable, Kothuru Police Station, on the date of incident, was discharging duties in the police station. On hearing cries, PW-3 went outside the police station and saw the accused stabbing the deceased with a knife. He ran there and caught hold of the accused, who was stabbing. PW-4 was also present at that point of time. PW-3 seized the knife from the accused. PW-20, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Kotturu Police Station recorded Ex.P15-statement of the deceased. PW-20 returned to police station and registered a case in Crime No. 53 of 2011 for the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC under Ex.P16-FIR. PW-20 seized M.Os.1 and 2 in the presence of PW-17 and L.W.23/Thota Rajagopala Naidu, the mediators. PW-20 also prepared Ex.P17-rough sketch of the scene of offence. At about 3.45 PM, PC No. 628 viz. Rajasekhar informed PW-20 about death of the deceased. The same was informed to PW-26, Inspector of Police, Kothuru Circle. On information, PW-26 rushed to the Area Hospital, Palakonda along with his staff by securing Panchayathdars. On receipt of death intimation, the section of law was altered from Section 307 IPC to Section 302 IPC. PW-26 secured the presence of panchayathdars and blood relatives, who are available in the hospital and conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of PWs. 1, 2, 6, 24 and LW-20/Kuna Anandharao and recorded their statements. During inquest, all the panchayathdars opined that the accused stabbed the deceased to death. PW-22, Civil Assistant Surgeon conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased. Ex.P20 is the Post-Mortem Certificate. According to the Doctor, cause of death of the deceased is due to shock and haemorrhage and due to antemortem injury to the left lung and heart. PW-26 took up further investigation and after collecting all the documents and after completion of investigation, he filed the charge sheet. 4. In support of its case, prosecution examined P.Ws 1 to 26 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P28 on its behalf, besides case properties M.Os 1 to 5. Ex.D1 to Ex.D5 were marked on behalf of defence. 5. The plea of accused is one of denial. 6. 4. In support of its case, prosecution examined P.Ws 1 to 26 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P28 on its behalf, besides case properties M.Os 1 to 5. Ex.D1 to Ex.D5 were marked on behalf of defence. 5. The plea of accused is one of denial. 6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant herein/accused submits that except the evidence of PW-6, sister of the deceased, there is no corroborating evidence; all the material prosecution witnesses did not support the prosecution case; the other eyewitnesses i.e. PWs. 3, 4, 5 and 7 are all police personnel and their evidence cannot be relied on to convict the appellant herein/accused, when their evidence is contradictory, highly improbable and unbelievable. Learned counsel further submits that there are serious inconsistencies and infirmities in the prosecution case and therefore, it is not safe to convict the appellant herein/accused. 7. On the contrary, learned Public Prosecutor for State contends that the ocular testimony of material prosecution witnesses is corroborated by the medical evidence; except PWs. 2, 8, 9, 11, 14 and 16, all the other material prosecution witnesses who witnessed the incident, in one voice deposed about accused causing death of the deceased in a broad daylight. PWs. 3, 4, 5 and 7 are all police personnel and at the time of the incident, they were discharging their respective duties in Kotturu Police Station and they witnessed the incident, as such, their evidence gives much weight to the prosecution case and corroborates the version of PW-6. He further submits that upon appreciation of entire prosecution evidence on record, the learned Sessions Judge rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant herein/accused and it does not warrant any interference by this Court and requests to dismiss the Criminal Appeal. 8. Now the point for determination is: Whether the prosecution is able to bring home the guilt of the appellant herein/accused for the charge levelled against him beyond reasonable doubt and whether the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge is sustainable or not? 9. This Court perused Ex.P20-Post-Mortem Certificate and the evidence of PW-22, Doctor. PW-22 conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased and found as many as five injuries on the dead body of the deceased. According to PW-22/Doctor, cause of death was due to shock and haemorrhage and due to antemortem injury to the left lung and heart. 10. 9. This Court perused Ex.P20-Post-Mortem Certificate and the evidence of PW-22, Doctor. PW-22 conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased and found as many as five injuries on the dead body of the deceased. According to PW-22/Doctor, cause of death was due to shock and haemorrhage and due to antemortem injury to the left lung and heart. 10. A perusal of the Ex.P.20 Post-Mortem Certificate and the evidence of PW-22/Doctor goes to show that the death of the deceased is homicidal in nature and according to PW-22/Doctor, the injuries are antemortem in nature and caused by a sharp pointed stabbing weapon. By virtue of the aforesaid evidence and the injuries, it can be safely inferred that death of the deceased is by homicide. 11. A perusal of evidence on record goes to show that PWs. 2 to 7, who are the eyewitnesses to the incident, deposed in one voice, about the occurrence of incident to the extent that accused had caused death of the deceased. According to PW-6, on 06.07.2011 at about 10.00 AM, she, along with the deceased, went to Dr. Atchannaidu Hospital for medical check-up and at about 1.00 PM, in their return journey, reached in front of Police Station situated opposite to GMR Complex. Then, accused suddenly came and stabbed the deceased with a knife. 12. The other prosecution witnesses i.e. PWs. 3, 4, 5 and 7, who are police personnel of Kotturu Police Station, witnessed the incident that occurred on 06.07.2011, as the said incident occurred in front of the Kotturu Police Station. They, in one voice, deposed about the accused stabbing the deceased in a broad daylight near GMR Complex situated opposite to Kotturu Police Station. 13. PW-3 is working as Head Constable. According to him, on hearing cries, he ran out and saw a person stabbing a lady with a knife. Immediately, he ran there and caught hold of the person, who stabbed the deceased. The accused was caught on the spot. Along with PW-3, PW-4 was also present. According to him, a person with red T-shirt came out from GMR complex, situated opposite to the police station and stabbed the deceased. PW-6 tried to stop the accused from stabbing the deceased. A passerby on the bike left his bike and caught hold of the deceased. PW-4 along with PW-3 caught hold of the accused and seized a knife from him. PW-6 tried to stop the accused from stabbing the deceased. A passerby on the bike left his bike and caught hold of the deceased. PW-4 along with PW-3 caught hold of the accused and seized a knife from him. Meanwhile, the Sub-Inspector of Police and the Inspector of Police came and all of them took the accused inside the police station. Apart from them, PW-5, who is other Police Constable, was also an eyewitness and he saw the accused causing the death of the deceased. 14. PW-6, who is none other than the sister of the deceased, was also present at the scene of offence and she too witnessed the incident. According to her, after her visit to Dr. Atchannaidu Hospital along with the deceased, they returned from the hospital to their house. When they reached in the front of the police station, all of a sudden, the accused stabbed the deceased with a knife and the deceased fell down, though PW-6 tried to catch her. According to her, PW-2 went there and stopped the accused and accused was handed over to police. Thereafter, PW-6 informed the same to her mother. 15. PW-7, who is a Police Constable, also witnessed the incident. According to him, he saw two girls walking from Complex towards Parapuram side. A person in red T-shirt came running and caught hold of the deceased towards the police station and stabbed her with a knife. The deceased shouted once and then, PW-6 also started shouting. Thereafter, PW-3 and PW-4 went there, took the accused into the police station and seized the knife. 16. PW-2, PW-8, PW-9, PW-16 and PW-23 did not support the prosecution case and they were treated as hostile by the prosecution. 17. PWs. 3 to 7 are the eyewitnesses to the incident and nothing has been elicited in their cross-examination to disbelieve their version. The incident is said to have taken place right in front of the police station. It is quite natural that all the police personnel would be present in the police station. On hearing cries, they immediately came outside, ran to the scene of offence and caught hold of the accused on the spot and seized the weapon used for stabbing, from the accused. There is nothing on record to discredit the evidence of PWs. 3 to 7. 18. To corroborate the evidence of PWs. On hearing cries, they immediately came outside, ran to the scene of offence and caught hold of the accused on the spot and seized the weapon used for stabbing, from the accused. There is nothing on record to discredit the evidence of PWs. 3 to 7. 18. To corroborate the evidence of PWs. 3 to 7, the prosecution examined PW-1, who is brother of the deceased. He deposed in his evidence that on coming to know that the deceased was being harassed by the accused by sending vulgar messages to her, he went to the accused and when the accused caught hold the shirtcollar of PW-1, he too caught hold of the shirt-collar of accused, and an argument ensued in between them, one day before the incident. PW-1 is said to have slapped the accused. In that connection, the accused had made a call to the deceased to her mobile phone and the said call was attended by PW-1. When PW-1 questioned as to who the person was, the accused had disconnected the call. 19. It is apparent on the record that when the accused was causing trouble to the deceased, a quarrel ensued between PW-1 and accused and PW-1 was said to have given a slap to the accused. In retaliation, on the very next day, the accused had gone to the extent of causing death of the deceased. There is motive for the accused to cause death of the deceased. 20. It is also apparent on the record that the accused stabbed on vital parts of the body of the deceased with M.O.1 i.e. knife viz. on her left side of chest and also on heart. She breathed her last within three hours from the time of stabbing. It can be safely concluded that accused had intention to cause death of the deceased and therefore, the same would come within the purview of Section 302 IPC. 21. The learned Sessions Judge, on proper appreciation of entire oral and documentary evidence on record, rightly found the accused guilty of the offence and accordingly, convicted the accused of the charge levelled against him. This Court has perused the Judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge and the same is well-reasoned judgment and it calls for no interference by this Court. 22. This Court has perused the Judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge and the same is well-reasoned judgment and it calls for no interference by this Court. 22. In the result, the Criminal Appeal No. 102 of 2017 is dismissed confirming the Judgment, dated 09.06.2016 passed in Sessions Case No. 178 of 2012 by the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srikakulam. 23. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.