Telangana High Court
The State Of A.P. vs Deverkonda Krishna Murthy And 3 ... on 28 September, 2022
Bench: K.Surender
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
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
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
(2013) 11 supreme court Cases 688
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
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1156 OF 2009
Dated: 28.09.2022
kvs
