Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Kunchala Sasi Krishna vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 25 September, 2024
Author: K.Suresh Reddy
Bench: K.Suresh Reddy
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AT AMARAVATI
MAIN CASE No.: RT No.1 of 2022 and Crl.A.No.190 of 2022
PROCEEDING SHEET
SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE
NO. NOTE
3) 25.09.2024 KSR, J & SRK, J
Crl. Appeal No.190 of 2022 has been filed
by the appellant/sole accused challenging the
conviction and awarding death sentence by the
learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge-
cum-Special Judge for trial of Cases under the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Guntur, in SC
No.85/S/2021, dated 29.04.2022.
The reference proceedings of the learned
IV Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-
Special Judge for trial of Cases under the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Guntur, vide
letter in Dis.No.315, dated 05.05.2022, for
confirmation of death sentence awarded by him in
SC No.85/S/2021, dated 29.04.2022, is numbered
as RT No.1 of 2022.
Charge sheet has been filed against the
appellant/sole accused for causing death of the
deceased. By his judgment dated 29.04.2022, the
2 KSR, J & SRK, J
RT No.1 of 2022 and Crl. Appeal No.190 of 2022
SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE
NO. NOTE
learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge-
cum-Special Judge for trial of Cases under the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Guntur
awarded death sentence as against the
appellant/sole accused.
Today, when the matters came up for
hearing, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the appellant submitted that, before awarding the
death sentence the learned Sessions Judge has
not elicited information from the State with regard
to mitigating circumstances and the accused has
not given any opportunity to produce evidence in
rebuttal, towards establishing all mitigating
circumstances and in support of his contention, he
relied upon a decision reported in Manoj v. State
of Madhya Pradesh, (2023) 2 SCC 353, wherein
the Hon'ble Apex Court held thus.
"Practical guidelines to collect mitigating
circumstances.
248. There is urgent need to ensure that
mitigating circumstances are considered at
the trial stage, to avoid slipping into a
retributive response to the brutality of the
crime, as is noticeably the situation in a
majority of cases reaching the appellate .
3 KSR, J & SRK, J
RT No.1 of 2022 and Crl. Appeal No.190 of 2022
SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE
NO. NOTE
stage.
249. To do this, the trial court must elicit
information from the accused and the State,
both. The State, must - for an offence
carrying capital punishment - at the
appropriate stage, produce material which
is preferably collected beforehand, before
the Sessions Court disclosing psychiatric
and psychological evaluation of the
accused. This will help establish proximity
(in terms of timeline), to the accused
person's frame of mind (or mental illness, if
any) at the time of committing the crime and
offer guidance on mitigating factors (1), (5),
(6) and (7) spelled out in Bachan Singh v.
State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 684. Even for
the other factors of (3) and (4) - an onus
placed squarely on the State - conducting
this form of psychiatric and psychological
evaluation close on the heels of
commission of the offence, will provide a
baseline for the appellate courts to use for
comparison, i.e., to evaluate the progress of
the accused towards reformation, achieved
during the incarceration period.
250. Next, the State, must in a time-bound
manner, collect additional information
pertaining to the accused. An illustrative,
4 KSR, J & SRK, J
RT No.1 of 2022 and Crl. Appeal No.190 of 2022
SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE
NO. NOTE
but not exhaustive list is as follows:
a) Age
b) Early family background (siblings,
protection of parents, any history of
violence or neglect)
c) Present family background (surviving
family members, whether married, has
children, etc.)
d) Type and level of education
e) Socio-economic background (including
conditions of poverty or deprivation, if any)
f) Criminal antecedents (details of offence
and whether convicted, sentence served, if
any)
g) Income and the kind of employment
(whether none, or temporary or permanent
etc);
h) Other factors such as history of unstable
social behaviour, or mental or psychological
ailment(s), alienation of the individual (with
reasons, if any) etc.
This information should mandatorily be
available to the trial court, at the sentencing
stage. The accused too, should be given
the same opportunity to produce evidence
in rebuttal, towards establishing all
mitigating circumstances.
251. Lastly, information regarding the
5 KSR, J & SRK, J
RT No.1 of 2022 and Crl. Appeal No.190 of 2022
SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE
NO. NOTE
accused's jail conduct and behaviour, work
done (if any), activities the accused has
involved themselves in, and other related
details should be called for in the form of a
report from the relevant jail authorities (i.e.,
Probation and Welfare Officer,
Superintendent of Jail, etc.). If the appeal is
heard after a long hiatus from the trial
court's conviction, or High Court's
confirmation, as the case may be - a fresh
report (rather than the one used by the
previous court) from the jail authorities is
recommended, for an more exact and
complete understanding of the
contemporaneous progress made by the
accused, in the time elapsed. The jail
authorities must also include a fresh
psychiatric and psychological report which
will further evidence the reformative
progress, and reveal post-conviction mental
illness, if any.
252. It is pertinent to point out that this
court, in Anil v. State of Maharashtra,
(2014) 4 SCC 69, has in fact directed ..
criminal courts, to call for additional material
(SCC p.86 para 33)
"33. .....Many a times, while
determining the sentence, the courts take it
for granted, looking into the facts of a
6 KSR, J & SRK, J
RT No.1 of 2022 and Crl. Appeal No.190 of 2022
SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE
NO. NOTE
particular case, that the accused would be
a menace to the society and there is no
possibility of reformation and rehabilitation,
while it is the duty of the court to ascertain
those factors, and the State is obliged to
furnish materials for and against the
possibility of reformation and rehabilitation
of the accused. The facts, which the courts
deal with, in a given case, cannot be the
foundation for reaching such a conclusion,
which, as already stated, calls for additional
materials. We, therefore, direct that the
criminal courts, while dealing with the
offences like Section 302 IPC, after
conviction, may, in appropriate cases, call
for a report to determine, whether the
accused could be reformed or rehabilitated,
which depends upon the facts and
circumstances of each case."
(emphasis supplied)
We hereby fully endorse and direct that this
should be implemented uniformly, as further
elaborated above, for conviction of offences
that carry the possibility of death sentence."
A perusal of the aforesaid judgment goes to
show that the Hon'ble Apex Court observed that it
is for the trial Court to ensure that mitigating
circumstances are considered at the time of
7 KSR, J & SRK, J
RT No.1 of 2022 and Crl. Appeal No.190 of 2022
SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE
NO. NOTE
awarding punishment. The Hon'ble Apex Court
categorically stated to the extent that while
awarding death sentence, it is essential that all the
mitigating factors have to be considered in doing
so. One of the factors that has to be considered is
the accused person's frame of mind (or mental
illness, if any) at the time of committing the crime
and the mitigating factors (1), (5), (6) and (7) as
spelt out in Bachan Singh's case.
Apart from the same, the age and earlier
family background of the accused, present family
background and type and level of education, his
socio-economic background and criminal
antecedents are all the factors, which are to be
taken into consideration. The behavior of the
accused in the jail has also to be taken into
consideration, while confirming the death
sentence.
Taking into consideration the guidelines
laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the
judgment referred to above, we deem it
appropriate to call for a report from the jail
authorities not only with regard to the soundness
of mind of the accused but also with regard to
other parameters which are laid down in the
judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court referred to
above.
For the aforesaid reasons, we hereby
8 KSR, J & SRK, J
RT No.1 of 2022 and Crl. Appeal No.190 of 2022
SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE
NO. NOTE
direct (1) the District Collector, Guntur, Guntur
District, (2) the Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Guntur, Guntur district and (3) the Superintendent
of Central Prison, Rajahmundry, to send their
reports within a period of two (2) weeks from
today, in terms of the observations made in this
order.
List these matters on 22.10.2024.
Registry is directed to communicate the
copy of this order to (1) the District Collector,
Guntur, Guntur District, (2) the Deputy
Superintendent of Police, Guntur, Guntur district
and (3) the Superintendent of Central Prison,
Rajahmundry.
___________________
K.SURESH REDDY, J
..
_______________________
K.SREENIVASA REDDY, J
Note:
Issue CC today
(B/O)
Nsr
9 KSR, J & SRK, J
RT No.1 of 2022 and Crl. Appeal No.190 of 2022
SL. DATE ORDER OFFICE
NO. NOTE
