Telangana High Court
Aviraboina Veeranna, Warangal ... vs The State Of A.P., Rep.By Pp., High ... on 11 March, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1024 of 2011
ORDER:
The present criminal Appeal is filed aggrieved by the Judgment, conviction and sentence imposed by the learned I Special Judge for SC/ST (POA) Cases-cum-VII Additional District Judge, at Warangal in S.S.C.No.100 of 2007, dated 09.08.2011.
2. The specific case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant cum victim by name Chukka Dhanalaxmi (Pw.1) belongs to Madiga caste which comes under SC category, whereas the accused belong to Yadava caste which is other than SC/ST category and they are resident of Kancherlagudem village. The Pw.1 working as Anganwadi teacher since 14 years and her marriage took place with one person of Bayyaram village about more than 10 years back and took divorce. Since then onwards she is staying with her parents. Accused No.1 developed lust over her to have sexual intercourse and in the month of September, 2005 he approached her when she was at Anganwadi center, introduced himself and also took her mobile number and on the same day 2 night he contacted her on mobile phone and asked permission that he wants to talk with her personally, for which she warned and as accused No.1 continued to contact her by phone and developed friendship with her and he also offered to marry her and for which she rejected, but the accused No.1 did not change his behaviour and the same was informed to elders Muthyam Saraiah and Muthyam Sarvesh (Pws.4 and 5) and admonished him, after that he kept quiet for about one month and he again continued his behaviour and also threatened her if he fails to marry her, he would commit suicide and made her believe with delusion words, she believed the words of him and surrendered herself and continued to indulge in sexual intercourse with him, due to which she conceived and became pregnant and accused No.1 gave some medicines for abortion thereafter when she insisted him to marry, he postponing the same on one pretext or the other stated that he can marry her after performing marriage of his sister, subsequently the marriage of the sister of accused No.1 was celebrated and when she insisted that on 19.07.2006, the accused No.1 took her to Mahabubabad to a 3 Shivalayam in order to perform marriage, where he stated that she had illegal contacts with several people and if he would marry her as she belongs to Madiga caste, his parents and community people will not allow him to come to their house and only in order to fulfil his lust with her that he promised to marry her and there is no evidence to prove that he got in contact with her and bluntly refused to marry her. Upon that she approached the elders by name Shangacherla Venkanna and Chukka Pullaiah and others narrated about the attitude of accused No.1, upon that the elders advised to try by going to his house, upon that on 23.08.2006 that the Pw.1 and her parents Chukka Lachaiah and Chukka Iddamma went to the house of accused and requested the accused No.1 to marry Pw.1, upon that all the accused abused them in filthy language taking out their caste name in public view and caught hold of the tuft of Pw.1 pushed her on the ground and beat her with hands indiscriminately and also threatened her with dire consequences to see her end if she again made any proposal for marriage with accused No.1 and the same was witnessed by Pw.4 to Pw.6 and Pw.9 and then she filed a 4 private complaint and the same was forwarded to the police, Kuravi and on 06.10.2006 the same was registered for the offences under Sections 376, 420, 506, 509, 324 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3(i)(xi) and (xii) of SC/ST (POA) Act and after appointment the investigating officer took up the investigation and examined the Pws.1 to 6 and 9 and recorded their statements and also obtained the caste certificate of the victim. Thereafter, accused and the victim were also referred for medical examination. On receiving all the necessary documents charge sheet was filed against the accused for the offences under Sections 417, 420, 323, 506 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(i)(x) of SC/ST (POA) Act against accused No.1 and Sections 323, 506 of IPC and 3(i)(x) of SC/ST (POA) Act against accused Nos.2 and 3.
3. After filing of the charge sheet as there is prima facie case made out against the accused that the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mahabubabad had taken cognizance of the above said offences against the accused and registered it as P.R.C.No.01 of 2007.
5
4. After appearance of the accused, after furnishing copies to the accused, committed the case to I Additional District and Sessions Court, Warangal, who is having jurisdiction to try the offences under SC/ST (POA) Act.
5. After receiving the case file as there is a prima facie case made out against the accused and the same is taken on file and numbered as S.S.C.No.100 of 2007. After apprehension of the accused and on hearing of the accused, charges under Sections 323 and 506 of IPC and Sections 3(i) (x) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 are framed, read over and explained to the accused to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
6. During the course of trial, the prosecution has examined PWs.1 to 11 and got marked Exs.P1 to P10 and on behalf of the accused Dw.1 was examined and got marked Exs.D1 to D3.
7. After appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record, the learned District Judge has passed the order in S.S.C.No.100 of 2007, which reads as under:
6
"When accused No.1 is questioned with regard to the quantum of sentence, he stated that he is working as Car driver and he has to maintain his parents and widowed sister and his falsely implicated in this case. Taking into consideration of their representation and in view of the nature and gravity of the proved offence under Section 417 IPC, it is not a fit case to take a lenient view. But, in the circumstances pleaded by the accused, it just and reasonable to convict accused No.1 under Section 235 (2) Cr.P.C and sentenced him to undergo S.I. for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- or in default of payment of fine, accused No.1 shall undergo S.I. for ten days. The remand period, if any shall be set off under Section 428 Cr.P.C."
Aggrieved by the same, the appellant/accused No.1 has preferred the present criminal appeal.
8. Heard and perused the record.
9. The learned counsel for the appellant/accused No.1 did not place any material before this Court, which would discredit the evidence. Therefore, no interference is warranted as far as conviction is concerned, but with regard to the sentence, it may be mentioned that the offence took place in the year 2005 and this revision was filed in the year 2011 and almost 13 years have passed and during this period, the revision petitioner/accused must have 7 repented for what he did. In these circumstances and in the interest of justice, it is expedient to modify the sentence of imprisonment to the period already undergone by the revision petitioner/accused while maintaining the compensation imposed by the trial Court.
10. The Criminal Revision case is dismissed. However, the sentence imposed by the trial Court to undergo Rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months is set off to the period already undergone by the appellant/accused No.1, while maintaining the compensation imposed by the trial Court against him.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________________ JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL Dated: 11.03.2024 mmr