Appeal against conviction for murder and robbery of a woman at a lodge. The High Court found the last-seen theory inapplicable due to a long time gap, no proof of ownership of the recovered ear studs, and PW-9 unreliable as the room had no window, and acquitted the appellant.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY
AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 1075 OF 201R
Between:
V.Ganga Raju @ Raju, S/o. Gangadharappa, aged 28 years. welding work, Janatha Colony, Uppara Caste, Veeranagepalli Village, Chikkamaluru Post, Puravara Hobli Madhugiri Taluk, Karnataka State. ...APELLANT AND The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature, Hyderabad For the State of Telangana and State of Andhra Pradesh
^ ...RESPODENT Appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C against the Judgement dated 15-9-2015 passed in SC.No. 250/2013 on the file of the court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Hindupur, Anantapur District.
Counsel for the AppellantrSRI. GANGA KUMAR CHAKRAVARTULA
(LEGAL AID)
Counsel for the Respondent: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: JUDGEMENT
1
KSR, J & BVLNC, J Crl.A.No.l07S of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
SPECIAL DIVISION BENCH
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 1075 of 2016
Between:
Veeranagepalli Gangaraju @ Raju, Aged 28 years, S/o. Gangadharappa, Welding work, Janatha Colony, Uppara Caste, Veeranagepalli Village, Chikkamaluru Post, Puravara Hobli, Madhugiri Taluk, Karnataka State.
.. .Appellant / Accused
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh.
... Respondent/ Complainant
Counsel for the Appellant(s) : 1.5588/Legal Aid 2. Sri Ganga Kumar Chakravartula
Counsel for the Respondent(s) : Public Prosecutor (AP) The Court made the following:
2
KSR.I&BVLNC.J Cil.A.No.1075 of 2016
JUDGMENT
(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice B. V.L.N. Chakravarthi)
The present Criminal Appeal is filed by the appellant/sole accused being aggrieved by the judgment, dated 15.09.2015 in S.C.No.250 of 2013, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hindupur.
- The appellant/accused was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hindupur for two charges i.e., first charge was for the offence punishable under Section 392 IPC and the second charge was for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC.
- The substance of the charges is that on 10.09.2012 the appellant/accused and one Alvelamma (hereinafter referred to as “deceased”) stayed in Room No. 106 of Sabina Lodge, Dhargha Circle, Penukonda and that on the same day during night hours, the appellant/sole accused did commit murder by intentionally causing her death by throttling withatoweland also committed theft of her gold ornaments
- After completion of trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hindupur, found the appellant/sole accused guilty for the offence under Sections 392 and 302 IPC and sentenced him
KSR, J & BVLNC, J Crl.A.No.l075 of 2016
to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 10yearsand also to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- for the offence under Section 392 IPC, in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for six (06) months. He was further sentenced to undergoRigorous Imprisonment for “LIFE’ and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one (01) year for the offence under Section 302 IPC. Both the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.
The accused and deceased had illicit intimacy and they came to Sabina Lodge at Penukonda Village to quench theirlust on 09.09.2012 at about 2.45 P.M and occupied Room No.106, which was allotted by PW-2, who in turn informed theallotment to PW-1-Manager of the Lodge. Later, Pw-2 witnessed the accused leaving the Lodge at about 7.30 A.M on 10.09.2012 on the pretext of getting breakfast. Subsequently, PW-2during evening went to the room and knocked the door, buttherewas no response. On suspicion, he pushed the door and foundthe deceased lying dead on the cot. Immediately, he informed to PW-1, who in turn, presented Ex.P-1 report to the Police.The
4
KSR.J&BVLNC.J Crl.A.No.l075 of 2016
Sub-Inspector of Police, Penukonda Police Station(PW-19) registered a case in Cr.No.l21 of 2012 for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and submitted originalFIR- Ex.P-21 to Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Penukonda,and copies to all the concerned including the Inspector of Police (PW-20). Later, on receipt of the copy of F.I.R, the Inspectorof Police, Penukonda Circle, who was examined as PW-20, visited Room No. 106 of Sabina Lodge in Penukonda Town, and found the dead body of a female on the cot and found one towel tied around her neck and also found some letters on her left hand as Alivelu”. He observed the scene of offence, photographs were taken, rough sketch was prepared and seized a leather bag along with the wearing apparels of the deceased under the cover of mediators report in the presence of one Nagaraju (PW-12)and another. The Inspector of Police verified the customers register in the Lodge and found that the accused and deceased came to the Lodge. He examined PW-1 and recorded his statement on 11-09-2012. He continued the investigation, again visited the lodge, secured the presence of M.Rathamma (PW-4), C.Pujitha (PW-5) and others, who identified the dead body asthatofthe deceased and later conducted inquest over the dead body in the
5
KSR.J&BVLNC.J Crl.A.No.l07S of 2016
presence of P.Nagaraju (PW-12) and another, examined the above mentioned witnesses and recorded their statements and also examined PWs-2 and 3 and recorded their statements. During inquest, he seized the wearing apparels of thedeceased i.e., a blue colour petty coat (MO.4), bed sheet (MO.5),Nosestud (MO.6), one pair of ear studs (MO.7), one black beadthread (MO.8) and rings (MO.9) in the presence of mediators. After completion of inquest, the dead body was shifted to the hospital for autopsy. The Civil Assistant Surgeon, Penukonda Government Hospital, who was examined as PW-16, conducted autopsy on 11.09.2012 over the dead body of the deceasedin between 2.45 P.M and 3.45 P.M and found a “U” shapesizeof 4x4 cms abrasion over left mastoid region to right mastoid region and issued Ex.P-7 Post-Mortem report opiningthatthe deceased would appear to die from Asphyxia from strangulation prior to 6 to 13 hours of Post-Mortem examination. On 30.09.2012 at about 8.00 A.M, he arrested the accusedinthe presence of mediators and seized one pair of ear studs (MO.7), two cell phones (MOs.lO and 11) 8ind cash of Rs.5,000/- (MO.3) from the possession of the accused. Thereafter, healsofound two receipts of pledging the gold. One receipt is ofMahalakshi Jewellers, Doddaballf»Dur and another receipt is of Champalal
6
KSR, J & BVLNC,J Cri.A.No.l07S of 2016
Jewellers, Doddaballapur. In pursuance of the confession made by the accused, the Inspector of Police along with mediators went to Champalal Jewellers shop and enquired PW-10, who produced gold ear studs pledged by the accused. The Inspector of Police verified the pledge registerandcollected the copy of the same. Thereafter, he prepared a seizurenamafor seizure of gold ear studs. In pursuance of the statement of the accused, he visited the house of the accused and seized cash of Rs.5,000/-. After completing all formalities, the accused was produced before the concerned Magistrate for remandinghimto judicial custody. Thereafter, steps were taken to conductTest Identification Parade (TIP) by the Magistrate to identify the accused. After completion of investigation, he filed the police report (charge sheet).
- When the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., he denied the incriminating evidence found against him from the prosecution witnesses but he did not choose to
KSft, J & BVLNC, J Crl.A.No.l07S of 2016
examine any witness in his defence. But, got markedExs.D 1 to D-3.
- C.H.Imdadulla Khan (PW-1) is the Manager of the Sabina Lodge. His evidence would show that on one day, theaccused and deceased came to their lodge and taken Room No.106 at about 2.45 P.M, which was allotted by PW-2 in his absenceand the same was informed to him by PW-2 on the same day at about 5.00 P.M. He made necessary entries in the Register. Later, on the next day morning i.e., at about 7.30A.M the accused informed the room boy that he was going outside in order to bring breakfast and the room was bolted from outside and later the room boy visited the room at about 5.00 P.M for cleaning purpose and knocked the door and as there was no response, he opened the doors and found the dead body of the deceased on the cot. He immediately informed to himandlater he presented Ex.P-1 report to the police.
KSR, J & BVLNC, J CH.A.No.1075 of 2016
Pw.2 went to Room No. 106 and found the same was bolted from outside. Then, he himself opened the door and found the dead body of the deceased lying on the cot. Immediately,heinformed the same to Pw. 1. Further, according to his evidence, the accused left the Lodge on that day at about 8.00 A.M on the pretext of bringing breakfast, but he did not turn back.
- S.Maddileti (Pw.3) is another room boy working at the relevant point of time. His evidence would show that on 09-092012 the accused and deceased came to the Lodge during noon time and Pw.2 allotted Room No. 106 and they occupied the same and on the next day morning at about 7.00 A.M he went to upstairs to clean the floor, at that time Pw.2 went to Room No. 106 and found the room was locked from outside. He knocked the door but it was not opened. Then, he himself opened the door and found the dead body of the deceased on the cot. Therefore, the evidence of Pw.3 would establish that the deceased and the accused came to the Lodge on 09-09-2012at about 2.45 P.M and occupied Room No. 106, which was allotted by Pw.2 and on the next day morning at about 7.30 A.M i.e., on 10-09-2012 the accused left the Lodge on the pretext of getting breakfast, but he did not come back to the Lodge. Onthe same day, during evening hours i.e., at about 5.00 P.M Pw.2 went to
KSR,J&BVLNC,J CrI.A.No.lOTS of 2016
Room No. 106 for cleaning purpose and noticed thatthedooris bolted from outside and he knocked the door, but hedidnotget any reply. Then, he himself opened the door and found the deeeased in supine position on the cot. Immediately, he informed Pw.l. Therefore, their evidence would establishthat the accused did not return to the Lodge after he leftthelodgeat about 7.30 A.M on 10.9.2012.
10
KSR, J & BVLNC, J Crl.A.No.l07S of 2016
A.M only on 10-09-2012 and he did not return to the Lodge later. The evidence on record would establish that the deceased was very much alive by the time the accused left the Lodge. Therefore, there is a long time gap between the lastseenandthe death of the deceased. Hence, we are of the considered opinion that the last seen theory cannot be applied to theaccusedtofix him as the person responsible for murder of the deceased.
- The other circumstance relied upon by the prosecutionin this case is recovery of gold ear studs from the possessionofthe accused in the presence of mediators. The prosecution also contended that that the gold ornaments belonging to the deceased and the same were committed theft after murdering her and later pledged the same at Doddaballapur. It is pertinent to note that the prosecution has examined the motherofthe deceased (Pw.4), husband of the deceased (Pw.7) andchildrenof the deceased (Pws.5 and 6). The said witnesses did not identify the gold ear studs, which were seized from the possessionofthe accused as that of the property of the deceased lyingwithherat the relevant point of time. Therefore, there is no evidence on record establishing the ownership of the gold ear studs,which were seized from the possession of the accused, toshowthatit is a stolen property belonging to the deceased.
11
KSR, J & BVLNC, J Cri.A.No.l07S of 2016
/
12
KSR.J&BVLNC,J CrLA.No.lOVS of 2016
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the criminal appeal, shall stand closed.
SDl- S.V.S.R. MURTHY JOINT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
To.
nm
HIGH COURT
DATED:22/03/2024
JUDGMENT
CRLA.No.1075 of 2016
cP
"xo 2 9 JUN 202^1 <3.
y■\k
J
. Current Section ^
ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL APPEAL
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the last-seen circumstance could fix guilt on the accused given the time gap between last seen and death.
Whether the seized gold ear studs were proved to belong to the deceased so as to establish theft.
Whether the testimony of the alleged eyewitness PW-9 was reliable.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Veeranagepalli Gangaraju @ Raju
The State of Andhra Pradesh
K Suresh Reddy
B V L N Chakravarthi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
