Telangana High Court
Aviraboina Veeranna, Warangal ... vs The State Of A.P., Rep.By Pp., High ... on 11 March, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1024 of 2011
ORDER:
The present criminal Appeal is filed aggrieved by the
Judgment, conviction and sentence imposed by the learned
I Special Judge for SC/ST (POA) Cases-cum-VII Additional District
Judge, at Warangal in S.S.C.No.100 of 2007, dated 09.08.2011.
2. The specific case of the prosecution is that the de facto
complainant cum victim by name Chukka Dhanalaxmi (Pw.1)
belongs to Madiga caste which comes under SC category, whereas
the accused belong to Yadava caste which is other than SC/ST
category and they are resident of Kancherlagudem village. The
Pw.1 working as Anganwadi teacher since 14 years and her
marriage took place with one person of Bayyaram village about
more than 10 years back and took divorce. Since then onwards she
is staying with her parents. Accused No.1 developed lust over her
to have sexual intercourse and in the month of September, 2005 he
approached her when she was at Anganwadi center, introduced
himself and also took her mobile number and on the same day
night he contacted her on mobile phone and asked permission that
he wants to talk with her personally, for which she warned and as
accused No.1 continued to contact her by phone and developed
friendship with her and he also offered to marry her and for which
she rejected, but the accused No.1 did not change his behaviour and
the same was informed to elders Muthyam Saraiah and Muthyam
Sarvesh (Pws.4 and 5) and admonished him, after that he kept quiet
for about one month and he again continued his behaviour and also
threatened her if he fails to marry her, he would commit suicide
and made her believe with delusion words, she believed the words
of him and surrendered herself and continued to indulge in sexual
intercourse with him, due to which she conceived and became
pregnant and accused No.1 gave some medicines for abortion
thereafter when she insisted him to marry, he postponing the same
on one pretext or the other stated that he can marry her after
performing marriage of his sister, subsequently the marriage of the
sister of accused No.1 was celebrated and when she insisted that on
19.07.2006, the accused No.1 took her to Mahabubabad to a
Shivalayam in order to perform marriage, where he stated that she
had illegal contacts with several people and if he would marry her
as she belongs to Madiga caste, his parents and community people
will not allow him to come to their house and only in order to fulfil
his lust with her that he promised to marry her and there is no
evidence to prove that he got in contact with her and bluntly
refused to marry her. Upon that she approached the elders by name
Shangacherla Venkanna and Chukka Pullaiah and others narrated
about the attitude of accused No.1, upon that the elders advised to
try by going to his house, upon that on 23.08.2006 that the Pw.1 and
her parents Chukka Lachaiah and Chukka Iddamma went to the
house of accused and requested the accused No.1 to marry Pw.1,
upon that all the accused abused them in filthy language taking out
their caste name in public view and caught hold of the tuft of Pw.1
pushed her on the ground and beat her with hands indiscriminately
and also threatened her with dire consequences to see her end if she
again made any proposal for marriage with accused No.1 and the
same was witnessed by Pw.4 to Pw.6 and Pw.9 and then she filed a
private complaint and the same was forwarded to the police,
Kuravi and on 06.10.2006 the same was registered for the offences
under Sections 376, 420, 506, 509, 324 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code
and under Sections 3(i)(xi) and (xii) of SC/ST (POA) Act and after
appointment the investigating officer took up the investigation and
examined the Pws.1 to 6 and 9 and recorded their statements and
also obtained the caste certificate of the victim. Thereafter, accused
and the victim were also referred for medical examination. On
receiving all the necessary documents charge sheet was filed
against the accused for the offences under Sections 417, 420, 323,
506 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(i)(x) of SC/ST (POA) Act
against accused No.1 and Sections 323, 506 of IPC and 3(i)(x) of
SC/ST (POA) Act against accused Nos.2 and 3.
3. After filing of the charge sheet as there is prima facie case
made out against the accused that the learned Judicial First Class
Magistrate, Mahabubabad had taken cognizance of the above said
offences against the accused and registered it as P.R.C.No.01 of
2007.
4. After appearance of the accused, after furnishing copies to
the accused, committed the case to I Additional District and
Sessions Court, Warangal, who is having jurisdiction to try the
offences under SC/ST (POA) Act.
5. After receiving the case file as there is a prima facie case made
out against the accused and the same is taken on file and numbered
as S.S.C.No.100 of 2007. After apprehension of the accused and on
hearing of the accused, charges under Sections 323 and 506 of IPC
and Sections 3(i) (x) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 are framed, read
over and explained to the accused to which the accused pleaded not
guilty and claimed to be tried.
6. During the course of trial, the prosecution has examined
PWs.1 to 11 and got marked Exs.P1 to P10 and on behalf of the
accused Dw.1 was examined and got marked Exs.D1 to D3.
7. After appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on
record, the learned District Judge has passed the order in
S.S.C.No.100 of 2007, which reads as under:
"When accused No.1 is questioned with regard to the
quantum of sentence, he stated that he is working as Car driver and
he has to maintain his parents and widowed sister and his falsely
implicated in this case. Taking into consideration of their
representation and in view of the nature and gravity of the proved
offence under Section 417 IPC, it is not a fit case to take a lenient
view. But, in the circumstances pleaded by the accused, it just and
reasonable to convict accused No.1 under Section 235 (2) Cr.P.C
and sentenced him to undergo S.I. for six months and to pay a fine
of Rs.500/- or in default of payment of fine, accused No.1 shall
undergo S.I. for ten days. The remand period, if any shall be set off
under Section 428 Cr.P.C."
Aggrieved by the same, the appellant/accused No.1 has preferred
the present criminal appeal.
8. Heard and perused the record.
9. The learned counsel for the appellant/accused No.1 did not
place any material before this Court, which would discredit the
evidence. Therefore, no interference is warranted as far as
conviction is concerned, but with regard to the sentence, it may be
mentioned that the offence took place in the year 2005 and this
revision was filed in the year 2011 and almost 13 years have passed
and during this period, the revision petitioner/accused must have
repented for what he did. In these circumstances and in the interest
of justice, it is expedient to modify the sentence of imprisonment to
the period already undergone by the revision petitioner/accused
while maintaining the compensation imposed by the trial Court.
10. The Criminal Revision case is dismissed. However, the
sentence imposed by the trial Court to undergo Rigorous
imprisonment for a period of six months is set off to the period
already undergone by the appellant/accused No.1, while
maintaining the compensation imposed by the trial Court against
him.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
closed.
____________________________
JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL
Dated: 11.03.2024
mmr
