Marri Shyam Kumar Reddy vs The State Of Telangana
2023 Latest Caselaw 2860 Tel

 HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY

           CRIMINAL PETITION No.8962 OF 2023

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') by the

petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 seeking to quash the proceedings

under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.(examination of accused) dated

31.07.2023 in S.C.No.461 of 2022 and to direct the I Additional

District and Sessions Judge, Yadadri Bhongir District at Bhongir

to examine the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 afresh under

Section 313 of Cr.P.C. by allowing the prosecution and defense to

invoke Section 313 (5) of Cr.P.C.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri S.Ganesh,

learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State.

Perused the record.

3. The facts of the case, in brief, are that on 23.07.2019 at

14:00 hours, respondent No.2 filed a complaint against the

petitioners alleging that the marriage of his third daughter with

petitioner No.1 was performed on 17.08.2017. At the time of

marriage, respondent No.2 gave Rs.20,00,000/- as dowry to the

petitioners. On 02.08.2018, the daughter of respondent No.2 was

blessed with a baby girl. Since then, the petitioners started

harassing the daughter of respondent No.2 both mentally and

physically and also demanded additional dowry. On 21.07.2019,

the petitioners came to the house of respondent No.2, assured that

they would look after the well being of the daughter of respondent

No.2 and took her and baby with them. On 22.07.2019 at 9:00 PM,

the daughter of respondent No.2 informed him that the petitioners

again started harassing her mentally and physically for additional

dowry, asking her to die so that they could perform another

marriage to petitioner No.1 and get additional dowry. Respondent

No.2 informed his daughter that they would held a panchayath on

the next day. In the morning of 23.07.2019 at 10:30 hours, the

nephew of respondent No.2 informed respondent No.2 that his

daughter and granddaughter succumbed to death due to burnt

injuries. After coming to know about the incident, he found that

the dead bodies of D1 and D2 were taken to Bhongir Area hospital

for post-mortem examination. On suspicion that his daughter and

granddaughter were murdered by the petitioners, respondent No.2

lodged a complaint. On the basis of said complaint, a case in FIR

No.86 of 2019 on the file of the Station House Officer,

Bommalaramaram Police Station, Yadadri Bhongir District, for the

offence under Section 304 (B) read with Section 34 of the Indian

Penal Code.

(b) After due investigation, the police filed charge sheet.

The I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Yadadri Bhongir

District at Bhongir took cognizance of the same and numbered the

case as S.C.No.461 of 2022.

(c) The trial Court framed charges against the petitioners

for the offence punishable under Section 304 (B) read with Section

34 of IPC and the prosecution examined Pws.1 to 18 and got

marked Exs.P1 to P10. After closure of prosecution evidence, the

petitioners were examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. on

31.07.2023.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the

counsel appearing for the petitioners before the trial Court

represented that he will assist the Court in preparing the

questionnaire, which are put to the accused, while examining the

petitioners under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and brought to the notice

of the trial Court about the right encompassed under Section

313(5) of Cr.P.C. The counsel on record before the trial Court also

relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Premchand v.

State of Maharastra 1. But, the trial Court, ignoring the plea of

counsel for the accused, went ahead and conducted examination

under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. It is further contended that the

(2023) 5 SCC 552

questions, which were put to the accused, were complex and are

not simple in nature and they are nothing but cut, copy and paste

of depositions, which were been directly put to petitioners. It is

also contended that the petitioners were not able to give crisp

answers for the said questions as they cannot be answered in one

word or sentence as it belongs to mixed questions of fact of law.

Therefore, prayed to quash the proceedings under Section 313 of

Cr.P.C. dated 31.07.2023 in S.C.No.461 of 2022 and also to direct

the trial Court to properly frame questions under Section 313 of

Cr.P.C. to enable the petitioners to answer them as the

incriminating evidence of the prosecution.

5. On perusal of impugned proceeding i.e., examination of the

petitioners under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., it is evident that some set

of questions were put to the petitioners in causal manner and that

each of the questions are running in paragraphs and found to be

the entire deposition of each of the evidence of prosecution was

asked in paragraphs, for which, it would be hard for the petitioners

to answer them in a proper manner, in a single word or sentence.

6. In the said circumstances, the proceedings under Section

313 of Cr.P.C. dated 31.07.2023 in S.C.No.461 of 2022 I Additional

District and Sessions Judge, Yadadri Bhongir District at Bhongir

are hereby quashed with the following directions to the trial Court:

a) To pick up the incriminating evidence i.e., oral and

documentary evidence and to question the petitioners with

each of the incriminating evidence against them, which is

available from the evidence of prosecution.

b) To frame simple questions in short sentences that can be

understood by the petitioners.

c) Wherever the evidence is common for all the petitioners,

same questions can be put to all the petitioners.

d) For the purpose of guidance, the trial Court is directed to

follow the guidelines as specified in Meenakshi and others

v. State of Karnataka 2 at paragraph No.8 while examining

the petitioners under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.

e) The trial Court Judge is directed to first of all prepare the

questions, which are put to the petitioners, for examination

under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and then fix a date and thereby

examine the petitioners on the said date.

f) The trial Court is also directed to dispose of S.C.No.461 of

2022 as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a

period of two (02) months after completion of examination of

the petitioners under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.

2021 6 KarLJ 442

7. With the above directions, the Criminal Petition is disposed

of.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

__________________________________ G.ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY, J Date: 04.10.2023 TMK

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY

CRIMINAL PETITION No.8962 OF 2023

Date: 04.10.2023 TMK