HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.532 OF 2012
JUDGMENT:
This Criminal Appeal is filed by the Appellants/Accused Nos.1 to 10, aggrieved by the conviction recorded by the Special Sessions Judge for Trial of Cases under SCs & STs (POA) Act- cum-VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar, in SC.Nos.1 of 2011, 38 of 2011 and 27 of 2009, dated 28.05.2012, whereby the learned Sessions Judge convicted Accused Nos.1 to 10 for the offence punishable under sections 448, 427 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- for the offence under section 427 R/w.34 of IPC and further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.500 for the offence under Section 448 R/w.34 of IPC; convicted the Accused Nos.1 and 3 for the offence under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 506 of IPC and further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each for the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST (POA Act, 1989.
2. Heard and perused the record.
2
3. Briefly, the case of the prosecution is that PW1 was running a hospital in the name of Divya Hospital at Shadnagar. He belongs to 'Yerukala' caste, which is a Scheduled Tribe. On 09.09.2008, a person was admitted in the hospital of suspected snake bite. The duty doctor diagnosed and gave medication. However, the person developed neurological signs and ultimately died. On the very same day, nearly 25 persons entered into the hospital and ransacked the hospital by breaking glasses, damaging furniture and also beat the staff.
4. For the reason of the attack on the hospital, PW1 filed a complaint to the police which is Ex.P1. In the said complaint, PW1 narrated that a person had come to the hospital who was suspected of being bitten by a snake and accordingly treatment was given. However, the patient died due to various reasons and at that time, the villagers of the deceased trespassed into the hospital, who were 25 in number and beat-up the hospital staff. It is also mentioned in the complaint that the mob used filthy language and insulted by taking caste name of PW1.
5. As seen from the complaint, it was made on 10.09.2008. The police having investigated the crime filed charge sheet. PW1 was examined on 17.01.2012, i.e. nearly after 3 ½ years after the 3 incident. In the complaint PW1 did not mention about the persons who entered into the hospital and ransacked the hospital. There is no mention as to how he can identify any of the persons. Admittedly, they were all strangers to PW1. Further there is no narration with respect to the persons who have uttered any words in the name of caste of PW1.
6. Though, the police have investigated, it is not mentioned as to how these appellants who were ten in number were identified, out of nearly 25 members, who have trespassed into the hospital. It is also not made clear as to why the other 15 members were not identified and let off, during the course of investigation. It was a case whereby a mob angered by the death of a person due to the treatment given by the hospital doctors, trespassed into the premises and ransacked the hospital. In such cases there is every possibility of the relatives of the deceased being implicated in such incident. Admittedly, no CC TV footage was filed as evidence before the Court. Further, there was no test identification parade till PW1 was examined before the Court. Out of the mob of 25 people who ransacked hospital, it is not made clear as to how PW1-doctor could identify the appellants who were 10 in number, after a period of nearly 3 ½ years and admittedly all the appellants were strangers to him.
4
7. In the said circumstances, the very case of the prosecution becomes highly doubtful and for the several discrepancies and contradictions which are elicited during the course of examination regarding the identity of the accused persons who had made utterances about the caste of PW1 and also as to how the appellants were identified, it is unsafe to sustain the conviction on such evidence.
8. Accordingly, benefit of doubt is given to the appellants and accordingly, the appellants/Accused 1 to 10 are acquitted of the charges under Section 448, 427 read with 34 of the Indian Peanl Code and Appellants 1 to 3/A1 to A3 for the offence under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989.
9. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is allowed. Since the appellants/accused 1 to 10 are on bail, their bail bonds shall stand cancelled.
Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand dismissed.
__________________ K.SURENDER, J Dt.:07.11.2022 tk 5 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 532 OF 2012 Dt. 07.11.2022 tk