HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1156 of 2009
JUDGMENT:
1. The State filed the present appeal questioning the acquittal of the respondent/accused for the offence under Sections 509 and 305 of IPC vide judgment in SC No.70 of 2007 dated 07.11.2007 passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge at Nalgonda.
2. The case of prosecution is that the deceased is the daughter of P.W.1 and the respondents/A1 to A3 are cousin brothers of the deceased and A4 is paternal aunt of the deceased. The deceased was working as a daily wage labourer and since three months prior to 17.02.2006, on which date, the deceased committed suicide, A1 to A3 were forcing her to love them and marry them. The deceased informed to her parents. However, P.W.1 did not heed to the said complaint. The village elders also know about this and P.W.6 had proposed to get the deceased and A3 married. A4 having come to know about the love affair of the deceased and A3, insulted the deceased stating that she was enjoying sexual life with A1 to A3 and if she had any respect, she should die. Hearing abuses of A4, the deceased consumed poison and she died on the way to hospital on 2 16.02.2006. Complaint was made on 17.02.2006 by father stating that the respondent/accused were responsible for causing death of his minor child.
3. The police having investigated the case concluded that the A1 to A4, who are respondents herein were responsible for the offence under Sections 509 and 305 of IPC.
4. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge having examined the witnesses P.Ws.1 to 13 and marking Exs.P1 to P14 found that the respondents/A1 to A4 were not guilty on the following grounds; i) there is no evidence that at any point of time A4 abused the deceased; ii) P.Ws.8 and 9, who are witnesses to the inquest turned hostile to the prosecution case and stated that their signatures were obtained on blank papers; iii) statement of parents of deceased P.Ws.1 and 2 was not convincing as there was never any complaint for a period of three months, though the deceased was allegedly harassed; iv) P.W.6, on whom the prosecution relies upon to state that he proposed to get A3 and deceased marry, turned hostile to the prosecution case; v) P.Ws.1 and 2, who are parents of deceased, never witnessed any harassment by A1 to A3 and none of the 3 witnesses have directly witnessed any kind of harassment by A1 to A3 or any such abuses of A4.
5. There is no direct evidence to support the allegation that A1 to A3 were following the deceased and proposed to marry her. There are no witnesses to the alleged abusing of A4 stating that the deceased was sleeping with A1 to A3 and if she had any shame, she had to die. The evidence totally lacks in support of the allegations of the prosecution about the abuse by A4 and that A1 to A3 were following and proposed to marry the deceased.
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhakrishna Nagesh v. State of Andhra Pradesh1 held that under the Indian criminal jurisprudence, the accused has two fundamental protections available to him in a criminal trial or investigation. Firstly, he is presumed to be innocent till proved guilty and secondly that he is entitled to a fair trial and investigation. Both these facets attain even greater significance where the accused has a judgment of acquittal in his favour. A judgment of acquittal enhances the presumption of innocence of the accused and in some 1 (2013) 11 supreme court Cases 688 4 cases, it may even indicate a false implication. But then, this has to be established on record of the Court.
6. In the said circumstances, there are no grounds to interfere with the well reasoned judgment of the trial Court to reverse the finding of acquittal of the accused.
7. For the aforementioned reasons, the Criminal Appeal is liable to be dismissed and accordingly dismissed.
_________________ K.SURENDER, J Date: 28.09.2022 kvs 5 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1156 OF 2009 Dated: 28.09.2022 kvs