Jillela Narender Reddy 9 Others vs The State Of A.P. Rpe., By Its Pp
2022 Latest Caselaw 5667 Tel

             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.

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

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.

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

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 532 OF 2012

Dt. 07.11.2022

tk