Nanda Kumar Kasini Vs The State of Telangana

[³³⁸⁵ l

IYoIF :^{Ttre AppellanuPetitioner was directedto be released} on bair by the order of the High court dated 26-07-2023 in r.A.No.2 ot 2023 in crr.A.No.638 oi'zoial.-^--

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶4

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

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA

¶7

CRIMINAL APPEAL No: 638 of 2023

¶8

Appeal under Section 37ae) ot cr.p.c aggrieved by the Judgment dated 07-02-2022 passed in s.c.No.9 of 2020 on the file of the court of the principal District and Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy

¶9

Between:

¶10

!9n!a_{qqar^{Kasini, S/o Late yeilaiah, Age about 52 years,} Occ Unemployed, Fl/o 5-2-93/1, shanthi Nagar, sangareddy T"own sangareooy oiJtri"t,-rJl,ig;,a.'

¶11

...AppellanUPetitioner

¶12

AND

¶13

I|r.g,!tflt9^{glTglangana,Through Sangareddy Town potice Station, Rep. by the} PuDlrc Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad

¶14

...RespondenUState

¶15

Gounsel for the Appellant: Sri Midhun Kumar Allu

¶16

Counsel for the Respondent: Additional public prosecutor

¶17

The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT

¶18

,o

¶19

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA

¶20

CRIMINAL APPEAL No.638 of 2o23

¶21

JUDGMENT:

¶22

This appeal is hled by the appellant aggrieved by the conviction a;rd sentenced imposed in S.C.No.9 of 2O2O by^the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy. The appellanl. is charged for the offence^{punishablerrnder} Section 302 of Indian Penal Code (for short^{'lPC).Tht: trial} Judge founcl the appellant guiity for the offence^punishable under Section 3O4 part-I of IPC and he was sentenced to undergo Rig,116115 imprisonment for a period of ten^years and to pay a fine of Rs.SOO/-, in default of payment of file, to suffer S.l. fc,r a period of three months. The remand^period undergone by the appellant was set off against the^{srrhrstantive} sentence of imprisonment.

¶23

Heard Sri Midhun Kumar Allu, learned counsel frrr the appellant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-lState

¶24

2

¶25

The contention of learned counsel for the appellant is that basing on the complaint of complainant, regarding dispute between two brothers and under the heat of arguments, the appellant killed the deceased who is his elder brother. The trial Court basing on the evidence of Pws. I to 5, Exs.P. 1 to P. 14 and M.Os.l to 3 convicted the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that appellant is not contesting the appeal on merits. His only contention is that he is suffering from various health issues. As per the medical certificate issued by the Sanjeevani Hospital, Central Prison, Cherlapalli, the appellant is suffering with mental illness and he is regularly undergoing treatment in Yerragadda for his Phychiatric illness, he is also suffering with Neurological problem and he underwent left eye cataract and is on medication. Appellant is aged about 52 years and he is in jail during pendency of trial and after conviction i.e., for the last six years.

¶26

Learned counsel further contended that for the offence under Section 304 Part-I of IPC, there is no sentence and punishment is upto ten years or if rhere is intention, life can be imposed. But the trial Court^sentencedthe appellant for

¶27

3

¶28

o

¶29

ten years.^{Tec appellantis in jail since six years'As nobody} is there to represent^{his case, he has not paid the fine amount} of Rs.50O/^{imposedby the trial Court,he requestedto rvaive} the fine amc'unt.^{Hence, prayed this Court to reducc the} period of sentence^{already undergoneby him'}

¶30

Learned Additional^{Public Prosecutor filedIeport} received from^{the Superintendent,Central Prison' Cherlapalli} stating that^{appellantis in jail for the last 6 yearsand 2 days} and he is suffering^{from varioushealth issues and atso p'lacld} the medical^{certihcatewhichshows that the appellanLis on} medication lor^{his illness.}

¶31

It

¶32

Consirlering the^{submissionsmade by thelearned} counsel for the^{appellant, the learnedAdditionalPublic} Prosecutor and the^{medical reportissued by the Medical} Ofhcer, Central^{Prison,Cherlapally, this Court is inclined to} modify thc sentence^{imposedby the trial court again st thc} appellant.

¶33

AccorCingly, the^{Criminal Appeal is partly allowcdand} the^judgmerrt d'ated^{07.O2.2O22 passed in S C'No 9 of 2O2O by} the Principal District^{andSessionsJudge, Medakat}

4

&

o

Sangareddy is modihed. The sentence often years imposed by the trial Court against the appellant is reduced to six (6) years two (2) days. Further, as payment of fine is mandatory, it cannot be waived. The appellant/accused be set at liberty forthwith, if he is not required in any other case or crime.

¶38

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shalt stand closed.

¶39

Sd/. K. SRIN]VASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR

\

To,

//TRUE COPY//

g'