Saturday, 11, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Govindaram Kanakaiah, Siddipet Town., vs The State Of Telangana, Rep Pp.,
2024 Latest Caselaw 4514 Tel

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 4514 Tel
Judgement Date : 21 November, 2024

Telangana High Court

Govindaram Kanakaiah, Siddipet Town., vs The State Of Telangana, Rep Pp., on 21 November, 2024

                                  1




     IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA,
                      HYDERABAD

                                 ***

               Criminal Appeal No.1315 of 2016


Between:

       Govindaram Kanakaiah, S/o Narsaiah
                                                 Appellant/Accused
                                Versus

       The State of Telangana
                                            Respondent/Complainant



           JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON : 21.11.2024

             THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURENDER
                             AND
            THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. ANIL KUMAR

1.     Whether Reporters of Local newspapers
       may be allowed to see the Judgments?              : Yes/No

2.     Whether the copies of judgment may be
       Marked to Law Reporters/Journals?                 : Yes/No

3.     Whether His Lordship wishes to
       see the fair copy of the Judgment?                : Yes/No




                                         _____________________
                                           K. SURENDER, J


                                         _____________________
                                           J. ANIL KUMAR, J
                                   2




           * THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURENDER
                            AND
           THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. ANIL KUMAR


               + Criminal Appeal No.1315 of 2016


% 21.11.2024


Between:

      #Govindaram Kanakaiah, S/o Narsaiah
                                                Appellant/Accused
                                Versus

      #The State of Telangana
                                          Respondent/Complainant

^Counsel for the appellant/      : Sri. M. Venkat Reddy Kodumury
accused                                 (legal aid counsel)

^Counsel for the respondent/:   Sri. Arun Kumar Doddla
complainant                   Additional Public Prosecutor for
                                      respondent-State

< Gist:

> Head Note:

? Cases referred: NIL
                                 3




      THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
                      AND
     THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE J.ANIL KUMAR


           CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1315 OF 2016
JUDGMENT:

(per Hon'ble Sri Justice K.Surender)

The appellant was tried for the offence under Section

302 of IPC for committing murder of his wife. However, since

the learned Sessions Judge found that the offence falls within

Section 304-II of IPC, he has sentenced the appellant to

undergo 10 years imprisonment for the said offence. Further,

the appellant was also convicted for the offence under Section

3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention

of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'the Act') and sentenced to

undergo life imprisonment.

2. Heard learned legal aid counsel for the appellant and

learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of

respondent-State.

3. The facts of the case are that the appellant has poured

kerosene on the deceased, who is his wife, belonging to SC

community, on 07.08.2015, in the evening, when she refused

to prepare Upma. She was set on fire and then taken to

hospital. Initially, the case was registered under Section 307

of IPC. Thereafter, she died on the next day i.e., on

08.08.2015. Accordingly, Section of law was altered to 302 of

IPC.

4. Having gone through the record, we do not find any

reasons to interfere with the finding of the learned Sessions

Judge, in convicting the appellant for the offence under

Section 304-II of IPC. The prosecution also did not prefer any

appeal against the acquittal of the appellant under

Section 302 of IPC.

5. Imprisonment for life was inflicted on the basis of

Section 3(2)(v) of the Act, which reads as under:

3. Punishments for offences of atrocities ---

(2) Whoever, not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe ---

(v) commits any offence under the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) punishable with imprisonment for a term of ten years of more against a person or property [knowing that such person is a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe or such property belongs to such member], shall be punishable with imprisonment for life and with fine.

6. The provision enables the Court to punish the person

with imprisonment for life, when he commits any offence

punishable under IPC with imprisonment for a term of 10

years or more, against the person or property, knowing that

such person belongs to SC or ST caste.

7. The words used in the provision "punishable with the

imprisonment for a term of 10 years or more" would imply

that any offence committed and punishable under IPC,

should be punishable with minimum of 10 years or more, it

does not imply that offence which is punishable up to 10

years, would fall under the said provision of 3(2)(v) of the Act.

8. Section 304-II of IPC is punishable up to 10 years or

fine. Unless any offence under IPC is punishable upto a

minimum sentence of 10 years or above, the provision under

Section 3(2)(v) of the Act, cannot be invoked.

9. Learned Sessions Judge had committed an error in

concluding that appellant could be punished under Section

3(2)(v) of the Act, when he had recorded sentence of

imprisonment of maximum 10 years under Section 304-II of

IPC.

10. For the aforesaid reasons, the finding of the learned

Sessions Judge is erroneous and accordingly, the sentence of

life imprisonment imposed against the accused for the offence

under Section 3(2)(v) of the Act, is hereby set aside. Insofar as

the punishment under Section 304-II is confirmed. Since it is

brought to the notice of this Court that the appellant has

already served the sentence, the bail bonds against him shall

stand cancelled.

11. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal is partly allowed.

_________________ K.SURENDER, J

___________________ J. ANIL KUMAR, J Date: 21.11.2024 mnv/plp

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Media

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter