Sangaraju Jayachandra Raju vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 2104 AP

      HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

Crl.A. No.173 of 2022

                   PROCEEDING SHEET

Sl.                                                                               OFFICE
        DATE                                ORDER
No.                                                                                NOTE
1.    28.04.2022 AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, J
                     and
                TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO, J

                 (Per Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah)

                                Crl.A. No.173 of 2022

                         Heard Mr. S.R.A.Rosedar, learned counsel
                for the appellant, and Mr. S. Dushyanth Reddy,
                learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
                State.
                         2. The appeal is directed against the
                judgment dated 15.12.2021 in Special Sessions
                Case No.58 of 2016 passed by the learned
                Special       Judge   for    Trial    of     Offences    under
                Scheduled        Castes       and      Scheduled         Tribes
                (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - cum - VII
                Additional       District      and         Sessions     Judge,
                Prakasam District at Ongole by which the
                respondent no.2/accused has been acquitted of

charge under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is the father of the deceased and the accused was the husband of the deceased and had killed her.

4. It is submitted that the circumstances clearly reveal that the story of the deceased having committed suicide as propounded by the accused is incorrect, both circumstantially as well as on the medical evidence, which has been adduced before the Court and from the testimony of the Doctor, who performed the autopsy, it was submitted that the fact that the ligature mark

extended all around the neck, especially at the back, it could not be a case of hanging as in hanging, mark at the back would not be complete and it would be at the margin and not in the middle.

5. It was further submitted that the ceiling of the room in which suicide is said to have been committed is more than 9 feet whereas the deceased was only 4 ½ feet and nothing has been found to indicate that the deceased would have stepped on that so as to reach the hook for hanging herself.

6. It was further contended that the landlords, who were living in the ground floor, have deposed that the deceased and the accused were living in the first floor and on cry, when they reached the room, they saw the body lying in the room on the floor. Thus, it was submitted that despite there being overwhelming evidence to indicate murder, the acquittal by the Court is bad, both on facts as well as in law.

7. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor fairly submits that there are indications of foul play.

8. Issue notice to the respondent no.2.

9. In addition, let personal notice be issued to the respondent no.2 and proof of service filed by 14.06.2022.

10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, the matter is admitted and be listed on 21.06.2022.

______________________________ (AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, J)

_________________________________ (TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO, J)

AMD