Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Gudimetla Srinivasa Reddy ... vs The State Of Ap Rep By Its Pp Hyd., on 8 October, 2020
Author: C.Praveen Kumar
Bench: C.Praveen Kumar
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1305 of 2009
JUDGMENT:-
Heard through Video Conferencing (Blue Jeans App).
2. The sole accused in S.Cs.& S.Ts.Sessions Case No.9 of 2008 on the file of the learned Special Judge for Trial of Cases under S.Cs. & S.Ts. (POA) Act, West Godavari, Eluru is the appellant herein. He was tried for the offences punishable under Section 324 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, "the SCs and STs Act").
3. Vide judgment, dated 14.10.2009, the learned Special Judge found the accused guilty for both the offences and accordingly, convicted him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence punishable under Section 324 I.P.C. He was also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(x) of the SCs and STs Act. Both the substantive sentences of imprisonment were directed to run concurrently.
4. The facts in issue are as under:
P.W.1 is said to have lent an amount of Rs.10,000/- to the accused who promised to provide passport to him. Without 2 providing the same, the accused went to Mumbai and stayed there for about three months. After three months, the accused returned to his village. At that time, P.W.1 questioned the accused about the passport but the accused was postponing the same on one pretext or the other. When P.W.1 informed about the same to the elders in the village, they directed him to inform to the President of Juttiga Village. Accordingly, he informed the same to one Kankipati Venkanna (P.W.3), who is the Sarpanch of Juttiga Village. P.W.3 asked the accused to return the amount to P.W.1. On that the accused grew wild against P.W.1 for complaining about him. On 19.3.2007, at about 8:00 P.M., while P.Ws.1 and 2 were returning to their village after answering the calls of nature, the accused came opposite to them on a motor cycle and questioned P.W.1 as to why he was informing everybody in the village about the amount due to him, more so, when he has told P.W.1 that he would pay the amount. It is further stated that the accused abused P.W.1 as "NEE AMMA MALA PUKINI DENGA, NADEBBAKI REDDILU ADIRIPOYARU, NEEVU ENTHA NAKODAKA." Thereafter, he took out a beer bottle from his motor cycle, broke it and tried to stab P.W.1 with that broken bottle. At that point of time, P.W.1 raised both his hands to escape from the blow. As a result of which, he sustained an injury on his hand and on the right side of his chest. Immediately thereafter, P.Ws.1 and 2 went to Penumantra Police Station where the Head Constable -
P.W.5 sent him to Government Hospital, Tanuku and recorded the statement of P.W.1 in the hospital. Ex.P-1 is the report. The said report was forwarded by P.W.5 to P.W.6. - Assistant Sub Inspector of Police, Penumantra Police Station, who registered it as a case in 3 Crime No.26 of 2007 for the offences punishable under Section 324 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(x) of the SCs and STs Act and issued F.I.Rs. to all the concerned. Ex.P-2 is the original F.I.R.
P.W.1 was sent to Area Hospital, Tanuku where P.W.7 - Civil Assistant Surgeon examined him and found two lacerated injuries i.e., one on the right forearm and the other on the left side of chest. Ex.P-3 is the wound certificate issued by him. According to him, the injuries found on the body of P.W.1 were simple in nature and they are aged about 24 hours prior to his examination.
P.W.8 continued with the investigation. After receipt of a copy of the F.I.R., he proceeded to the scene of offence and prepared a rough sketch of the scene, which was marked as Ex.P-4. He examined P.Ws.2 to 4 and others and recorded their statements in detail. On 12.4.2007, at about 11:00 A.M., he arrested the accused at R & B Guest House, Marteru and thereafter, collected all the documents and filed charge sheet. It is also to be noted here that he has also obtained Caste Certificates of the accused and P.W.1, which are placed on record as Exs.P-6 and Ex.P-5 respectively. The said charge sheet filed by the police was taken on file as P.R.C.No.26 of 2007 on the file of the learned II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tanuku.
5. On appearance of the accused, copies of the documents, as required under Section 207 Cr.P.C., were supplied to him and later, the same was committed to the Court of the learned Special Judge constituted under the SCs and STs Act for trial and disposal in accordance with law.
4
6. Basing on the material available on record, charges, as referred to earlier, came to be framed, read over and explained to the accused in Telugu to which, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
7. To substantiate its case, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 8 and got marked Exs.P-1 to P-6.
8. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., with reference to the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses to which he denied. No oral evidence was adduced on behalf of the accused but Exs.D-1 and D-2 were marked on his behalf.
9. Basing on the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2, coupled with the evidence of the Doctor, the learned Special Judge convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Section 324 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(x) of the SCs and STs Act and accordingly, sentenced him as stated supra. However, Ex.P-5 - Caste Certificate of P.W.1 was held to be not proved legally. Challenging the same, the present appeal came to be filed by the accused.
10. Sri S.Subba Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant/accused, would submit that there are number of circumstances to indicate that the accused is innocent of the offences alleged. He would submit that because of enmity with one Gudimetla Satyanarayana Reddy, the present case was foisted against the appellant. He took me through the evidence of the 5 witnesses and the finding arrived at by the trial Court in support of his plea.
11. The same is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor contending that P.W.1, being an injured witness, his evidence cannot be doubted. According to him, things would have been different had there not been any attack on P.W.1. Since the medical evidence corroborates the version of P.W.1 in all respects, he would submit that the findings of the trial Court warrant no interference.
12. The point that arises for consideration is:
"Whether the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the accused for the offences punishable under Section 324 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(x) of the SCs and STs Act beyond all reasonable doubt?"
13. POINT:-
As stated earlier, P.W.1 is the injured witness while P.W.2 is an eye witness to the incident. In order to prove as to whether the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(x) of the SCs and STs Act is made out, it would be necessary to refer to the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 and also the finding of the trial Court with regard to Ex.P-5 - Caste Certificate.
14. Before dealing with the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2, it is pertinent to note that the trial Court, after considering the evidence of P.Ws.1, 2 and 4, came to a conclusion that Ex.P-5 cannot be taken into consideration. The relevant finding is as under:
"... Further, prosecution also filed Ex.P.5 caste certificate of P.W.1 through P.W.8. But, it is not proved according to law. Therefore, Ex.P.5 cannot be taken into consideration....." 6
However, the trial Court relied upon the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 4 to show that P.W.1 is a member of the Scheduled Caste. Even assuming that P.W.1 is a member of the Scheduled Caste, as deposed by him, the version of P.Ws.1 and 2 with regard to the words uttered by the accused are not consistent. In order to appreciate the same, it would be useful to refer to the same, which are as under:
"NEE AMMA MALA PUKINI DENGA, NADEBBAKI REDDILU ADIRIPOYARU, NEEVU ENTHA NAKODAKA."
"MAALA LANJAKODAKA, NAA DEBBAKI REDDILE ADIRIPOYARU, TALLIDENGA, NEEVU NANNU ALLARI CHESTAVA."
Though P.W.2 claims to have been present at the time when the incident took place, a reading of the evidence of these two witnesses would show that the words used by the accused are at variance. Further, it is also to be noted that the basis for the Court to come to a conclusion that P.W.1 belongs to a member of the Scheduled Caste is that his name is a Christian name, but P.W.8, who is the Investigating Officer in this case, categorically admits that he did not investigate personally about the same. It appears that having regard to the name of P.W.1, which is a Christian name, it was presumed that he is a converted Christian. A perusal of the cross examination of P.Ws.1 and 2 shows that both these witnesses used to go to church and their names are Christian names but the issue as to whether they have to be treated as Scheduled Caste was considered by the common High Court at Hyderabad in Chinni Appa Rao and Others vs. State of A.P. and another1 wherein this Court, after referring to various 1 [2016] 1 ALD (Cri) 545 7 judgments, held that merely because the name of the complainant is a Christian name, it does not by itself mean that he would be a member of the Scheduled Caste.
15. In view of the judgment referred to above, it could be said that prosecution has failed to prove beyond doubt that P.W.1 belongs to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe more so, when the trial Court disbelieved Ex.P-5 - Caste Certificate of P.W.1. Hence, the finding of the trial Court in holding the accused guilty for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(x) of the SCs and STs Act is set aside.
16. Coming to the offence punishable under Section 324 I.P.C., the evidence on record shows that on 19.3.2007, at about 8:00 P.M., while P.Ws.1 and 2 were returning after answering calls of nature, the accused intercepted them and thereafter, took out a beer bottle from his motor cycle, broke it and then, attempted to stab P.W.1. When P.W.1 raised his hands, he sustained injuries on his right hand and chest. Immediately thereafter, he lodged a report and thereafter, he was sent to a Doctor, who categorically speaks about lacerated injuries on right forearm and chest. P.W.2, who was accompanying P.W.1, corroborates the version of P.W.1 in all respects. Though both these witnesses were cross examined with regard to lodging of the report, the suggestions given were denied. From a reading of the cross examination, the plea appears to be that the above case came to be foisted at the instance of one Gudimetla Satyanarayana Reddy but the suggestions given remained as suggestions and nothing concrete has been produced to establish that this case has been foisted at his instance. 8 Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the finding of the trial Court that the accused caused injury to P.W.1 warrants no interference.
17. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the incident took place in the year 2007 and having regard to the fact that the appellant was in jail for sometime, pleads for reduction in the sentence. He further pleads that he was informed that the appellant is paralyzed and is bed ridden.
18. Having regard to these aspects, this Court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be met if the sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period already undergone but enhancing the fine to Rs.5,000/- in addition to the fine already paid. Accordingly, the appellant/accused is directed to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three (3) months. On deposit of the enhanced fine amount, the trial Court shall take steps for payment of the enhanced fine amount to P.W.1 as compensation under Section 357 Cr.P.C.
19. Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal is partly allowed.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Criminal Appeal shall stand closed.
_______________________________ JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR Date : 08.10.2020 AMD 9 38 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1305 of 2009 Date : 08.10.2020 AMD