Telangana High Court
Sugreev Kumar Rajbhar And 2 Others vs The State Of Telangana on 5 July, 2024
Author: P.Sam Koshy
Bench: P.Sam Koshy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.734 OF 2014
JUDGMENT:
(Per the Hon'ble Sri Justice Sambasivarao Naidu)
The appellants herein are accused Nos.1,2 and 4 in
S.C.No.327 of 2012 on the file of V Additional District and
Sessions Judge (Fast track Court), Ranga Reddy District.
Assailing the Judgment dated 23.06.2014, whereunder the
trial Court found them guilty for the offences under Section
302, 380 and 201 r/w 34 Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC')
while convicting them under Section 235(2) Cr.P.C.,
sentenced them under the above said penal provisions, the
appellants have filed this Criminal Appeal under Section
374 (2) Cr.P.C.
2. As could be seen from the impugned Judgment,
the trial Court sentenced the appellants herein to suffer
imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- with
default stipulation for the offence under Section 302 r/w
PSK,J & SSRN, J
Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014
34 IPC with further sentence of rigorous imprisonment for
six (6) months along with fine of Rs.100/- each for the
offence under Section 380 r/w 34 IPC and also convicted
them with one month simple imprisonment for the offense
under Section 201 r/w 34 IPC.
3. As per the allegations made in the charge sheet
that was filed against the appellants, these accused along
with one D.Kumar Goud who was shown as accused No.3
in the charge sheet and against whom the case was
separated because he was juvenile, used to attend work in
La Gardenia Apartment, Pragathi Enclave, Miyapur, where
one Anand Mole who was examined as PW1 was residing
with his family. The prosecution has alleged that the
accused have noticed that the family of PW1 was having
gold and net cash and PW1 was leaving the flat at 08:30
a.m., for attending his office duties, and as his wife
Smt.Nishita Mole (hereinafter be referred as deceased No.1)
was alone at the flat, they hatched a plan to commit theft
in the said flat. It is also alleged by the prosecution that on
31.01.2011 after PW1 left the house along with his
PSK,J & SSRN, J
Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014
daughter for dropping her in a school, the accused Nos.1
and 2 went to the flat i.e., flat No.805 and knocked the
door and when the deceased No.1 opened the doors, they
have informed her that they came to the flat to attend
mesh repair work, thereby she allowed them to the flat.
Meanwhile, accused Nos.3 and 4 joined them. It is also
alleged by the prosecution that accused No.1 hit her on the
back of her head with a hammer, she fell down, raising hue
and cry, which attracted her mother-in-law who is mother
of PW1-Smt. Vimal Mole who hereinafter be referred as
deceased No.2) and when she tried to catch hold of accused
No.1, he beat her with hammer on the back portion of the
head, accused No.2 stabbed deceased Nos.1 and 2 with a
knife and when the knife was broken, he has used a screw
driver and stabbed both the ladies and having confirmed
their death, they have entered the bedroom and removed
gold ornaments, net cash of Rs.30,000/- and a cell phone
and escaped from the house.
4. On the same day at about 04:00 p.m., PW1
received a phone call from his neighbour i.e., PW4 and
PSK,J & SSRN, J
Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014
came to know that his wife and mother were lying in a pool
of blood in the kitchen room. Thereby, he rushed to the flat
and found his mother and wife dead and lying in a pool of
blood. Therefore, he has proceeded to the police station
and presented a report, basing upon which the police have
registered a case in Crime No.34 of 2011 for the offence
under Section 302 IPC.
5. The police have visited the scene of offence.
They have secured the clues team who could collect foot
prints and finger prints from various places at the scene of
offence. Dog squad was also pressed into service. The
Investigating Officer has completed the other formalities
viz., preparation of scene of offence panchanama, inquest,
referring the dead bodies for post mortem examination.
During the course of time, the Investigating Officer could
know from PW5 who was supervisor of the La Gardenia
apartments that these appellants have abruptly left the
place without attending the remaining work, thereby he
had a suspicion against the appellants and other accused.
PSK,J & SSRN, J
Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014
Thereby, police personnel were deployed for nabbing the
suspects.
6. The prosecution has alleged that on 04.02.2011
accused Nos.1 to 4 i.e., appellants herein and accused No.3
were apprehended at Lingampally railway station and were
brought to police station. They were interrogated in the
presence of independent mediators and in pursuance of the
confession made by them, the stolen property was
recovered. Thereby, the appellants and the other accused
were produced before the Court for judicial custody.
7. It appears from the material documents that
though PW1 did not state anything about the loss of gold
and net cash from the house, after completing the funeral
of his mother and wife, he has verified from the house and
having noticed the missing of gold ornaments, net cash
from the house, he has informed the same to Investigation
Officer.
8. PW13-the then Inspector of Police, Miyapur
having completed the investigation, filed charge sheet again
the appellants herein. As could be seen from the charge
PSK,J & SSRN, J
Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014
sheet, it shows that the Investigation Officer has referred
the material objects to Forensic Science Laboratory (for
short 'FSL') where PW12 analyzed the material objects and
forwarded her report.
9. The charge sheet that was filed against the
appellants herein was registered as S.C.No.327 of 2012
and after furnishing the copies of charge sheet and other
record, the trial Court examined them and framed charges
under Section 302 r/w 34, 380 r/w 34 and 201 r/w 34
IPC.
10. To prove the case, the prosecution has
examined PWs 1 to 13 and marked Exs.P1 to P21 and also
marked MOs 1 to 12. The accused have examined one
Ramesh Prasad as DW1 and Exs.B1 to B5 were also
marked. The trial Court after appreciation of the entire
evidence produced before it, came to the conclusion that
the prosecution was able to prove the guilt of accused
Nos.1,2 and 4 for the offence under Section 302 r/w 34,
380 r/w 34 and 201 r/w 34 of IPC beyond all reasonable
PSK,J & SSRN, J
Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014
doubt and convicted them under Section 235 (2) Cr.P.C.,
and sentenced them as indicated above.
11. The appellants have filed this appeal
challenging the said conviction. Learned counsel for the
appellants has submitted that there is no eye witness to
the alleged offence. The prosecution wanted to prove the
guilt of the appellants on the basis of circumstantial
evidence. In such a case, the prosecution must be able to
establish complete chain of circumstances which would
prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt.
In this case, even as per the complaint which was
presented by PW1, soon after the death of his wife and
mother, it is silent about the theft of gold ornaments and
cash from his house. Therefore, it creates any amount of
doubt whether really there was theft at the house and
whether the said stolen property was actually recovered
from the appellants herein, or the same was planted by the
prosecution.
12. Learned counsel for the appellants further
argued that the evidence of PW5, basing upon which the
PSK,J & SSRN, J
Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014
Investigation Officer said to have deployed the police
personnel for the apprehension of the accused, creates any
amount of doubt whether in the absence of any record
maintained by him, really he was able to identify the
alleged missing of appellants from the flat, on that
particular day.
13. Admittedly, there was no record maintained by
PW5 about the details of the workers who attended the
work at that particular flat. Therefore, it would be highly
difficult for such a person to notice the missing of any
employee/worker. Therefore, it creates any amount of
doubt whether the Investigation Officer really apprehended
the accused with the stolen property or a false case has
been foisted. Learned counsel for the appellants has also
submitted that since two household women were killed in a
broad daylight, the police might have planted the gold
ornaments and cash as a link to connect the appellants
with the case and filed false case against the appellants,
but there is no acceptable evidence to connect the
appellants with the alleged crime and the appellants are
PSK,J & SSRN, J
Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014
entitled to benefit of doubt. Thus, prayed for setting aside
the impugned judgment and sought for acquittal of the
appellants.
14. On the other hand, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor has submitted that there is no dispute about
the death of deceased Nos.1 and 2 i.e., wife and mother of
the defacto complainant while they were alone at the flat in
a day light.
15. According to the averments made in the
complaint lodged by PW1 and as per the evidence of other
material witnesses, it is very clear that these ladies were
killed in the house. Therefore, one can easily guess the
reason for the said murders. There is nothing in the cross
examination of PW1 or other witnesses to accept that
somebody killed them due to any dispute. Therefore, the
murders were committed for gain.
16. The investigation Officer was able to collect the
finger prints from the wardrobe and refrigerator of the
house which were tallied with the finger prints of the
appellants herein. She has also argued that when PW1 who
PSK,J & SSRN, J
Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014
went to the office in the morning hours, after coming to
know about the death of his wife and mother and having
found them in a pool of blood, must have received shock
and he must have presented the report even without
verifying whether there was any theft. It is in the evidence
of PW1 that only after completion of post mortem, funeral
of his mother and wife at his native place, he was able to
verify about the missing of the property and immediately
he has intimated the same to Investigation Officer. The
same property was recovered from the accused/appellants
in pursuance of their confession before the independent
mediators. Therefore, the prosecution is able to prove the
guilt of the appellants by complete chain of circumstances,
as such sought for dismissal of the appeal.
17. As per the entire record including the evidence
of material evidence, it is quite clear that in the absence of
PW1 who had been to his office, and when his wife and
mother were alone at the house along with small kid, there
was an attack on these two ladies and their dead bodies
were found in a pool of blood, by the maid servant who
PSK,J & SSRN, J
Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014
picked up the daughter of PW1 from school and reached
the house in the evening time, The contention of PW1 that
he did not verify whether there was theft of any property
cannot be suspected perhaps he must have received a
great shock after seeing his wife and mother in a pool of
blood. PW1 categorically stated before the Court that only
after completion of funeral of his mother and wife, he could
notice the missing of gold ornaments and cash, he has
informed the same to the Investigation Officer.
18. According to the evidence placed before this
Court, it is quite clear that the death of deceased Nos.1
and 2 occurred on 31.01.2011. The investigation Officer
visited the scene of offence immediately after receiving the
complaint and obtained the photographs with the help of
PW6. He could obtain finger prints and foot prints from the
scene of offence on the same day with the help of PW9.
19. According to the evidence of PW7, he was
present when the police conducted panchanama at flat
No.805. PW5 categorically deposed before the Court that
the police have seized a knife from the place of offence.
PSK,J & SSRN, J
Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014
Whereas according to PW9, a fingerprint expert from Finger
Prints Bureau, DGP Office, Hyderabad, on 31.01.2011 on
receipt of information from Inspector of Police, Miyapur, he
rushed to flat No.805 and he along with clues team,
developed (3) chance prints from the place of offence. They
found two chance prints on refrigerator and one chance
print from ward robe. He has also deposed before the Court
that on 21.02.2011 they have received finger prints and
palm prints of accused Nos. 1 to 4 which were forwarded
by Inspector of Police, Miyapur and on comparison, he
found photo chance print marked as "A" is identical with
left middle finger print impression marked S1 on the finger
print slip marked "S" of accused No.1. The photo chance
print marked is identical with left hand palm print marked
"P1". He has prepared the comparison charts and
forwarded his report. He was of the opinion that photo
chance prints marked as A is identical with specimen left
middle finger impression of accused No.1 and chance print
marked C is identical with specimen left hand palm print of
accused No.2.
PSK,J & SSRN, J
Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014
20. Learned counsel for the appellants has argued
that the evidence of PW9 cannot be believed and there is a
chance of Investigation Officer obtaining the finger prints of
the appellants on the wardrobe and refrigerator before
showing their arrest in the records.
21. In fact, in the present case, as per the record
and as per the evidence of material witnesses soon after
registration of the case, the police have conducted a
panchanama at the scene of offence and could collect the
chance prints on refrigerator and wardrobe. By that time
the police have no clue about the identity of the culprits.
The evidence of Investigation Officer clearly shows that
after they had some information through PW5 and some
police personnel were deployed for the apprehension of
suspects and suspects were apprehended on 04.02.2011.
Therefore, there was no chance for the Investigation Officer
to take the suspects to the scene of offence and to see that
they affix their finger prints at the scene of offence.
22. In addition to this important evidence of PW9,
the evidence of mediator who deposed about the recovery of
PSK,J & SSRN, J
Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014
stolen property and seizure of the weapon used by the
appellants in the commission of offence further proves the
involvement of the appellants in the commission of the
offence. The recovery of the stolen property coupled with
the presence of the finger prints of these appellants at the
scene of offence, is further corroborated by the evidence of
PW5 who found the unexpected absence of appellants from
the place of work, clearly established their involvement and
also established the complete chain of circumstances
proving their guilt for the offence under Section 302, 380
and 201 r/w 34 IPC.
23. Therefore, the above stated oral and
documentary evidence would show that on 31.01.2011
PW1 left the house in the morning along with his daughter
and by that time his wife and mother along with his other
child were present in the house. In the evening the maid
servant who picked up the daughter of PW1 from school
came to the said flat and found the dead bodies of
deceased Nos.1 and 2 with injuries on vital parts and in a
pool of blood. PW1 was informed about this fact. He rushed
PSK,J & SSRN, J
Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014
to his house and presented a report to police. PW13 along
with clues team reached the scene of offence immediately
and scene of offence mahazar was prepared. PW9 collected
chance prints from the scene of offence on 31.01.2011 it
self. On 03.02.2011, PW1 after completing funeral at his
native place, returned to his house and verified from the
flat and then only he could realize the missing of gold etc.,
and informed the same to PW13. In the meanwhile PW13
could know from PW5 about the abrupt absence of these
appellants from the flat where they were supposed to have
attended the work till evening. The arrest of the appellants
while they were in possession of stolen property has been
proved through the independent mediator and seizure of
weapon from the appellants was also proved. The evidence
of PW9 coupled with the evidence of PW13 proved that the
finger prints of appellants at the scene of offence, is also
proved. Therefore, all these circumstances would prove the
complete chain of circumstances that proves the
involvement of the appellants. Therefore, the prosecution
was able to prove the guilt of appellants beyond all
PSK,J & SSRN, J
Crl.A.No. 734 OF 2014
reasonable doubt. Therefore, the appeal is liable to be
dismissed.
24. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. The
Judgment of the trial Court is confirmed.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall
stand closed.
_________________________
JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
___________________________________
JUSTICE SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU
Date: 05.07.2024
PSSK
