Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Yerrogopi Thulasiram vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 3 January, 2024

WEDNESDAY THE THIRD DAY OF JANUARY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

'PRESENT:
THE HONOURAGLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAD

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9549 OF 2023

Rotwvoer:

Yerrogop! Thulasiram, S/o. Late Y. Govindaswamy, Aged about 48 years, Gee
Employee in TTD. Riad No. 13/24, LB.Nagar, Near West Church, MLR Pall,

Tirupati Urban Mancdal, Trupati District
PetitionerfAccused 4
AND

The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra
Pradash At Amaravati

RespondentiCompmainant

Patition under Section 438 of Cr.P.0 is Med, praying that in the circumstances

stated In the memorandum of grounds Hed in support of the Criminal Petition, the
High Court may be pleased ta direct the Station House Officer, Alipiri Pollee Station,

Chittoor District to release the Petitionars/Accused No. 1 on ball In the event of his
arrest in connection with Cr No. 326 of 2023 of Allpii Poliog Station, Chiteor District

COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER - SRID PURNACHANDRA REDDY
COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT > PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING ORDER


THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.MALLIRARIUNA RAG

Criminal Petition No.9549 af 2023

retition is Med seeking anti cloatory ball uncer Sections 438

This Criminal

of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1975 CCrPC) & petitionerfAd in Crime

Mio 326 of 2023 of Alou Station, registered for the offence under Section

BOG, 48 S06 aad with 34 of indian Penal Coce (for short IRC') and

Sections 3 anc 4 of Bowry Prohdation Act.

2. Heart isarnecd counsel for the petit

Subvic Prosecutar representing the:

The case of BFOSECULO _ in brief, is that shoul 26 years aga, marriage

3
we

of the petitioner/A.1 was performed with the deceased. They both lived hapgly

ie perind and thereafter the petitioner addic cted ta vices and developer

for &O

are harassed the deceased for want of

egal relationship with another lady

aciditional dowry, and took separate rented house in Tirupathi. in the year

2019, he anplied for divorce with the help of AQ. Al and Ag harassed the

areased mentally and physically for want of divorce. The deceased requested

the petitioner/A.{ for reunion and A. refused the sarne. Due to that, the

deceased vexer! with her ffs, poured Kerosene on herself and Ht fire. While
ent she succumbed fo injuries.

undergoing trea

sel for the petiioner :

24 of IPO are not attracting fo the | Facts of the 3

yeancds that Sectian

present case. Th

306 read saith

ere shoud be


clear mens- rea to comrnit offence under Section 306 of IPC and there ought to
be an active ar direct act leach: ng the deceased to cammit suicieie bei ing fe with

ne option,

5, As per the case of prosecution, the marri: age of deceased with A.l was
held 26 years ago. They blessed with on @ gin by same Nikhite, now she js
aged about 15 years. Reacling of the report lodged by the mother of deceased
shaws that the deceased fled maintenance case against her

husband/petitioner/Al through a lawyer and the court ordered fo pay

oh

maintenance amount oF Rs.S000/- per month. Ib oy ning facie shows that the
petitioner and deceased were nat living together under the same roof The
report further shows that the petitioner herein fled divorce case against the
deceased in the Family Court. If seems that the petiiioner has initiated legal

proceedings to get divarc

eda,
os

On the other hand, the accusation made against A? js thet on

31.08.2023 around 6.30 PM, while the

483

deceased wes at home, a person by
name Govindgrajulu (4.2) whe is the uncle of pelitigner/A.i came and said to
the deceased that she should give divorce to the pettioner/A.i. Jt seams that
the deceased on the same day at about 8.45 P.M, comraitted suicide by pouring

xerosene on fer ane lit fire,

Pe Learned counsel for the petitioner points that this Court was pieased to

grant anticipatory bal to A.2 in OrLP.No.O012 of 2025, dated 65.12.2073.


. Vase ies
. wore net a hed 'ft a oo 4 as
oN Go 2 ® a os Gc 8
asd gor we oo cc 3 $3 hen Fond Pg ey cs By
fen Sam ese an Fs beet ween ip, eer 4
» Oh srs oy way BG
. wg fh tg ey wre : A . ae 3
ey how ped Sete & he sboct Se ag & Fea y 5
ae ras 3 me 7 is ie $3 nt
ie £5 iB rs wate ay 3 ee ha a m3 wv ee
a a 5 & + ye a
* ia tT £4 ae wine fod ped
re x , Oo OF ae oe a ee,
os iF oy eo ee Ye a : 3 Bode fe iF
' es = oo ; me Pe ge 74 ec ea 5
gOS ~  & % & | 3&8 $6 & BF 8B
6B : ; a4, i re: it eae 3 es my &
fe B « # vo G@ F
~ " 2 2&8 GCG 2 DS © mo Fg
3 5 hove rind . as tS oe EE £3 eS
x Pia Ss ed ae ay eg weoes os oe eee
. wv oe ae See aa 3 on heed res Pa
Ly rae a. te ry ant ae c s ae a ced ie is
"sent ra ; y Pesan 'ew oe 4 ised bene 3 rs QL
a BS te & co nn a oe
G att rate DG BD . ay = TS 4 "
Ay bs % BO ; wm ai oe
ox m re pe x3 See thee ve a3 nee $6 " gees
" ey oo i iy SB " be OB Bo
sheet ge "ox sees a oe y oe Fad came. ned rae H
ef ec & ee ge :
3 a £3 : aa _ be C3 ph
Bs on 4 os we en a v2 OE
fed '5 Be ge a a es a oh
" 4 pea oheek "ot od 33 ' ' i
th a so te oe £3 Be wy 2g bon bet
athe Pica Bove Senn eer ae het Hen he 8 7%
Fm Sn Gi Ki whoce YY we ae al
oe "a5 od 7 Be ben Za ee ns Gt 6B a,
fe? fon 3 a 5 " te co) ue te 25
taee, 5 Os +0 5 oe. aia
vf oe , a fo ys "3 & nee: > wy
oN ae s aU a ai wy a a3 z
' te vetee fo os nae] ed bo foe Ke wpe 48 7
a, oie Liem cas iy 7 ony Ipooe dee % ee Bure
we os bass %G 3 mF e ind ay to fe
{% Be on a od Ye wa Ded Reed ~ we
[vo '$3 4 oe bene <3 Co on we ~
Ae 2 4 ny KG non - ye feet, bee
sme a 7 ct ES sft sy ~" ac
FM @ ; a Oe
At 4, AL a3 mS a)
we? f 5 Si
or  ¥

O
a
ie

oubtul tc
&
hat the
habe
AS
Sd fe
oe

a
$5
mn
Aas i,

i et a Ae Me a a "
ed ike LA " P be Ld '
a "~ ce we SS ; ae © G& op
fom %%,, . 6B ut 63 303 heed
oe eon s . d "0, en ook ral G3
BOS fe @ 6 » 8 © G@ FE SB g &
2 Ly i Cs © Bo Fg BO eg " ¢
ea sone fess Sedd ns po as os P A 4 6
oS me te na ei £3 nd oe "Sox ane oe *

i A % és % oy we a rae a "os,

a m aid fan) ead a 3 yes be
ot os oe te oF, 3 ay Baeoey © faa
de pen Oa ya & on % oO Far
ee i af 8 2% 2 as: en & ar 5 & es
pane wa "dee - cs / wh, st s - fed
6G "het Jd Bon Reds is, a ; Be a Psa oe ey
Soe a oe Ro 7 " ane "G sd me Ree a e5
om Ro yg aD CS : mH ke By "3

Soar . ol aaa " a SE tee £2 Fs £%
as ad Bee Seat a we te ee hoe fe vA %

noes co : ben $ % ve a '00
se me aes fat $s 2% os a a7 oboe Es

ood

wee


rE P Ne os4g of 2074

20. The ather accusation made against the petitioner/A.. is that he

developed llicit Intimacy with a wornan, Learned counsel for the petitioner

relied on a decision reported In «V.Prakash Sabu v. State of Karnataka'.
ne Horrble Anex Court held that -

wite csaling mith she GUESHOR Efe agatonshio befween Are

apoeliant and the 2" accused therein was a Rawmariial fading to

o Sube _ 4
ue wane Be TREE OF Seca F98-A of IPC anc whetser

ze "e 5 ~. Es " :
iNBU WOU? amount fo abetment leading to the act af suiciee within

fhe mesning Section 206 IRC.
he Hor'ble Apex Court observed that

but for Ne alleged extra-marits! ralationstup. which if proved. coutd

' age . ¢ i N BS Ray yee + One
Be egal and émmoral nothing has been Aroy ON Out Oy hoe
PPOsecutin? fo shows Sak the esccused had Grovoked. iced or

"6

induced ihe site to commit suicide'

Li. & reading of the eect o complainant's report dees not show that the

ccused provoked, incited or induced the decease cd fo commit suicide,

ig. Considering the material on record and due to long standing disputes

between the deceased and the pettioner/A.) rong secs, this Court does not

* Cr PNo LIS ~ 1139 of S018, dated 22. LL.2016

Senses


VLE

"NS

fren

Rs

patory AR

anticip

oO
he

Y
Hy
x

gra

any

Sect
Nowe

is

¥«

j

:

t

Le. OF

week

R
3

roan

ey
poet

neeponendte!

.

ed § One spare copy 3, Fwo HIGH COURT TRE,.J DATED SAM /20a4 SAN. ORDER CREP No.g549 of 2029 OS a e a YS a Se BS SS TSS Se ees TNT SENT CN SRR >