Telangana High Court
Chirra Lakshman Rao, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 22 January, 2025
1
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.117 OF 2013
JUDGMENT:
1. This appeal is filed by the appellant aggrieved by the
judgment dated 14.11.2012 in S.C.No.1 of 2012, on the file of
Special Sessions Judge for Trial of Cases under SCs & STs
(POA) Act-Cum-Additional Sessions Judge, at Khammam. The
appellant was initially tried for the offences under Section
336-A, alternatively under Sections 366, 376, 415 r/w. 417,
493, 495 of IPC and Sections 3 (1) (xii) and 3 (2) (v) of SCs and
ST's (POA) Act.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant/Accused and
Sri M.Vivekanana Reddy, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor
for respondent-State.
3. Briefly, the case against the appellant is that while his
marriage with P.W.10 was subsisting, he again married P.W.2
by suppressing earlier marriage with P.W.10. The said
marriage had taken place at Peddamma temple where according
to P.W.2, the appellant tied Tali (sacred thread). At the time of
marriage, 4 photographs were also taken which were filed as
Ex.P.11.
4. Learned Sessions Judge found that the appellant was not
guilty of the offences under Section 376 of IPC and Section 3 (1)
(xii) and Section 3 (2)(v) of SCs & STs (POA) Act. However, he
was found guilty for the offences under Sections 366, 415
r/w.417 and 495 of IPC.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit
that the question of attracting an offence under Section 495 of
IPC does not arise unless it is proved that the person had
married again during life time of his wife which is punishable
under Section 494 of IPC. Since no such proof was filed by the
prosecution, the conviction under Section 495 of IPC has to be
set aside. Further, counsel argued that the question of
cheating does not arise since the marriage itself was not proved
and there was never any misrepresentation or inducement for
marrying P.W.2.
6. P.W.10 is the 1st wife of the appellant. She stated before
the Court that appellant is her husband and marriage took
place 5 years prior and they have a female child, who died.
Thereafter, she gave birth to two male twins. The appellant did
not dispute his marriage with P.W.10. Further, as seen from
the examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C, the appellant did
not dispute Ex.P.11, photographs of marriage nor the statement
of P.W.2 that appellant married her at Peddamma temple.
7. The argument of the learned counsel has no basis since
the appellant himself did not dispute that P.W.10 is his 1st wife
nor had he disputed marriage with P.W.2. It is evident that the
appellant had married P.W.2 when his marriage was subsisting
with P.W.10.
8. According to P.W.2, the factum of marriage with P.W.10
was not known to her nor did the appellant reveal that he was
already married.
9. In the present facts of the case, learned Sessions Judge
has rightly convicted the appellant for the offence of cheating
under Section 417 of IPC and also under Section 495 of IPC.
The conviction needs no interference. However, the sentence of
imprisonment under Section 495 of IPC is reduced to two years.
10. Learned Sessions Judge also convicted the appellant
under Section 366 of IPC. To attract an offence under Section
366 of IPC, it has to be proved that the woman was abducted
with an intent that she may be compelled to marry any other
person or to have sexual intercourse with any other person.
The word 'whoever' in Section 366 of IPC will not include the
person who had abducted the woman. Further, P.W.2 did not
state that she was forcibly taken or abducted for marrying the
appellant. For the said reason, Section 366 of IPC has no
application in the present facts of the case. Accordingly,
conviction under Section 366 of IPC is set aside.
11. In the result, the Criminal Appeal is partly allowed. Since
it is informed that the appellant is on bail, the trial Court shall
cause appearance of the appellant and send him to jail to serve
out the remaining part of the sentence imposed by this Court.
_________________
K.SURENDER, J
Date: 22.01.2025
dv
