Rapoli Srinu Vs The State of Telangana

¶1

' :1i

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER AND THE HONOURABLE SRI .JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI

¶6

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 182 OF 2018

¶7

Criminal Appeal under Section 374⁽²⁾ Cr.P.C. aggrieved^{by the Judgment} dated 05.10.20'17, passed in SC No. 441 ol 2015 on^{the file of the Court of the} Principal Sessions Judge at Khammam.

¶8

Between:

¶9

Rapolu Srinu, S/o. Venkulu @ Venkaiah, Coolie, R/o. Chirumarri Village, Ivludigonda Mandal, Khammam District. ...AppellanUAccused No.1

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Public Prosecutor,^{High Court at} Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State^of Andhra^Pradesh ...RespondenUComplainant

¶12

lA NO: 2 OF 2022

¶13

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the^{circumstances statedin} the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High^{Court maybe pleased to} enlarge the petitioner herein on bail by suspending^{the sentence imposedin in} S.C.No. 182 of 2018 dl. 511012017 on the file of the^{principal Sessions Judgeat} Khammam, pending disposal of the Crl.A.No.^{182 of 2018, and to pass}

¶14

Counsel for the Appellant : Smt. M Bhagyasri, Legal^Aid

¶15

Counsel for the Respondent : Sri Arun Kumar^Dodla Additional Public Prosecutor

¶16

The Court delivered the following :JUDGMENT

¶17

HON'BLE SRI JI,STICE^K.SURENDER and HON,BLE SRI JUSTICE^{ANIL KT'IVIARJI'KAIVTI}

¶18

CRIMINAL APPEAL^{No.182OF 2018}

¶19

JUDGMENT:^{(per Htn'ble Si Justice K. Surender)}

¶20

The appellani^{was convicted for the offenceun(ler Section} 3O2 of IPC rfv' 109^{IPC and sentenced toundergo Life} Imprisonment vide^{judgment inS.C.No.441of2()15, dated} 05.lO.2Ol7,^passed by the^{Principal Sessions Judge at} Khammam. Aggrir:ved by the^{sarne, present appeal.is filed}

¶21

PW.1 rn ho is the father of the^deceaseci ,^namely, Krishnaveni, wer'1 to the Police station^{and lodgecl} a Telugu on 30.08.2015 at 5.00 PM. In the written complaint-Ex.P1 complaint, he rLirrrated that the deceased^{got rnarriedto} Al/appellant, six -vears prior to the incident.^{The deceasedgave} birth to two children. 42, who is the^{younger brotht:r of PW.1,} went to Al's villaee ald a-lleged before A1 that^{his viliagerswere} talking about the Ceceased having illicit relation^{with his son-in-} law, namely, Sri Ramuhr. A1 then suspected her zrld started beating her. On 26.08.2015, around 3.0O P.M., Al beat the deceased with stol1e on her head. Immediately, the deceased was shifted to the hospital at Khammam. From Khammarl hospita-I,

¶22

I

¶23

2

¶24

the deceased was shifted to Warangal MGM hospital where the deceased died on O2.O9.2015, while undergoing treatment.

¶25

r^''i'

¶26

P.W. 13 received Ex.P1 complaint and registered the case under Section 324 rlw 34 IPC. Later, after the death of the deceased, section of law was altered to Section 3O2 r/w 34 IpC. After receiving information from M.G.M.Hospital, Warangal, where the deceased died, investigation was handed over to P.W. 14. P.W. 14 visited the mortuary of M.G.M Hospital and examined P.Ws.1 to 4, and the dead body of the deceased was photographed. Postmortem examination was conducted by

¶27

P.W. 1 1. P.W. 11 found the following injuries:

¶28

'1) A sutured utound of 3 cm ouer occipital area o;f the scalp of the skull.

¶29

Diffuse contusion of scalp ouer the occipital ared of the slcttll

¶30

Diffuse subdural hemonhage ond diffuse sub arachnaid hemorrhage of brain.

¶31

The appellant was arrested on 01.10.2015, at Chirumarri village and he was remanded to judicial custody.

¶32

Learned Sessions Judge, on the basis of the evidence of P.Ws.3, 4, 6, and 8 who witnessed the incident, recorded conviction.

¶33

The incident took place on 26.08.2015. Howevt:r, for four days, no complaint was hled. In the complaint that was hled after four days, the names of P.Ws.3, 4, 6, or 8 are not mentioned. The investigating officer admitted that eye witnesses were examined only afler the death of the deceased.

¶34

The defenc< of the appellant is that while he and the deceased were going on motor cycle, and while comirrg from the fields, they met u.ith an accident and both of them suffered injuries. The pare nts of the appellant admitted that both of them were in the hospit,al. He regained his consciousness after three days and came trt know that the deceased was admitted in the M.G.M. Hospital,^'Warangal. He went and met the cleceased in Warangal Hospital and she died one week after the incident.

¶35

Having taken specific defence that he and the de,:eased met with an accident and that both of them were hospir.alized, the appellant, hower.er', has not provided any documentary proof or examine any witness to substantiate the fact that he ruas treated in the hospital fcrt' the accident. Once the appellant has taken alibi, the burden shifts on to him to prove the alibi. Even during the cross-examination of the investigating officers or any of the

¶36

3,

¶37

4

¶38

witnesses, no such defence was taken by the appellant that he was involved in the accident with the deceased. For the first time during the course of Section 313 Cr.P.C examination, the said defence was taken.

¶39

)

¶40

I It is not necessary that the defence of the appellant has to be taken at the earliest point of time. The defence can also be stated at the time of Section 313 Cr.P.C examination. However, the defence taken by the appellant has to be corroborated with the other evidence. In cases of alibi being taken, the burden shifts on to the accused to prove the alibi. If at all the appellant was hospitalized as an inpatient over a period of time, there^' would be medical record to prove his hospitalizatjon. No steps were taken by the appellant to call for any record from the hospital, where he was treated. In fact, he has not even mentioned the name of the hospital where he was treated, during his Section 313 Cr.P.C examination.

¶41

The deceased died seven days after the assault by the appellant. The details of her treatment either in Khammam Hospital, or in M.G.M. Hospital, Warangal where she died, are not filed by the prosecution. The treating Doctor was not

¶42

5

¶43

examined. The case^{sheet of the deceasedis also no:. hled. The} medica-l evid,ence^{gains signihcancein the back ground of the} deceased being^{treated over aperiod ofseven days'The} prosecution, to strcceed^{in a case of homicidal death amounting} to murder, has^{to prove that the death of the decezised was a} direct consequencre^{of the injuries inflicted by the appellant.} There is no evidence to^{suggestthat the death wzrs a direct} conseqrrence of the injuries^{received by the deceasedon} 26.O8.20t5.

¶44

In the complaint, though^{the names of the eyt: witnesses} P.Ws.3, 4, 6, and B^{were not mentioned, howet'er, itwas} \ mentioned that the neighbors of deceased have taken her to the= hospital. It is not in dispute^{that P.Ws.3,4,6, anc:' 8 are the} neighbors of the trouse where the^{deceasedwas atta<;ked by the} appellant. Further, the appellant,^{to explain his abscrlndence till} the date of his arrest on^{01.09.20 15, had come up with the} version of his hosp italizafion.^{As already discussed,there is no} evidence of his hospitalizatton, and^{falsity of his deferlceand his} abscondence can be considered as relevant^{circr-rnrstancesto} trelieve the versiorL of the eye witnesses, that^{it was the appellant,} who caused injuries to the deceased.

¶45

I

¶46

6

¶47

L2. Since the prosecution failed to prove that the death was a direct result of the injuries caused by the appellant, the conviction under Section 302 IPC is hereby set aside. However, the appellant is convicted under Section 307 IpC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of eight yea_rs.

¶48

Since the appellant ls on bail, the concerned Court is directed to cause appearance of the appellant and send him to prison to serve out the remaining period of sentence. The remand period, if any, shall be given set off under Section 428 Cr.P.C

¶49