THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.712 of 2014 14-07-2014 BETWEEN:
Cherukuri Venkaiah …..Appellant AND State of A.P. Represented by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh …..Respondent THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING JUDGMENT: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.712 of 2014 JUDGMENT:
This Criminal Appeal is preferred by the complainant challenging the Judgment dated 12.05.2014 passed in Criminal Appeal No.208 of 2013 by the Judge, Family Court cum Additional District Judge, Guntur, whereby the learned Judge set aside the order of conviction dated 13-05- 2013 passed in C.C. No.233 of 2012 by the V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur.
The case of the prosecution, as recorded by the trial Court, is as follows:
L.W.1 – Cherukuri Venkaiah has got a son and daughter. He performed the marriage of his son with one Siva Parvathi of China Bazar, Lalapet, Guntur and the couple blessed with a boy and thereafter disputes arose in their matrimonial life. The daughter in law of L.W.1 lodged a complaint U/s. 498-A of IPC against him, his son and his wife in Lalapet P.S. which is pending before IV Addl. Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Guntur for trial. While so, on 28-3-2012 the son of L.W.1 went to IV Addl. Junior Civil Judge’s Court, Guntur to attend court adjournments, around at 3.00 P.M., Nagarampalem P.S. Police constable came to the house of L.W.1 and informed that the daughter in law of L.W.1 lodged a complaint against his son, as if he beat her in the court premises and asked him to come along with them to the police station. His son followed the police to the police station. At 3-30 P.M. A1 to A3 who are father, sister and relative of the daughter in law of L.W.1 criminally trespassed in to their house, scolded him and his wife L.W.2 in filthy language and attacked them by using criminal force, beat them with their hands and legs over their face and body indiscriminately. Further they threatened them to kill, out of fear they raised cries, on hearing the same, the neighbours rushed to the scene. On their arrival, A1 to A3 fled away from that place. On the same day at 10.00 P.M.
L.W.1 presented a report before the S.I. of Arundelpet P.S. which was registered as the present crime U/Secs. 448, 323, 506 r/w 34 IPC. During the course of investigation, he visited the scene of offence, examined the available witnesses and recorded their statements. He arrested A1 to A3 on 20-4-2012 in the P.S. and released them on bail after obtaining sufficient sureties. Since, no case is made out against Modugaparapu Anjamma, wife of A1 her name was deleted from the list of accused. Hence, the charge.
To substantiate the case of the prosecution, during the course of trial, P.Ws.1 to 5 were examined and Exs.P.1 to P.6 were marked. No oral evidence was adduced on behalf of the accused, but marked Exs.D.1 to D.4.
The learned trial Judge, after perusing the record and appreciating the evidence, found A.1 to A3 guilty for the offences under Sections 448 and 323 IPC and accordingly convicted and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months each and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) each, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month each for the offence under Section 448 IPC, and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) each, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month each for the offence under Section 323 IPC.
Aggrieved by the Order of the conviction by the trial Court, the accused preferred Criminal Appeal No.208 of 2013 before the lower appellate Court. The lower appellate Court has allowed the said appeal by setting aside the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court.
Aggrieved by the said Judgment, the complainant has preferred the present Criminal Appeal.
Heard and perused the record.
The accused and the complainant have disputes even prior to the occurrence and number of cases are pending against each other. In view of the animosity between the accused and the complainant, the learned appellate Judge was of the view that the evidence of P.W.1 should be corroborated with independent witnesses. Further, it is observed by the learned lower appellate Judge that even though P.Ws.3 and 4 claims to be independent witnesses, they have not supported the case of the prosecution in all aspects and that their evidence is self-contradictory and also contradictory with each other. Further, the prosecution has failed to show any medical evidence that P.W.1 is injured by the accused, except showing Out Patient slip. It is also observed by the learned Judge that except noting the name of P.W.1 and the O.P. number and the date, nothing is mentioned in the columns “diagnosis” and “comment” in the Out Patient slip. In the absence of any corroborative evidence with the evidence of P.W.1 and in the absence of medical evidence, the lower appellate Judge acquitted the accused. While acquitting the accused the learned appellate Judge recorded the following reasons.
As per the evidence of P.W.3, she initially says that she saw four persons in the house of P.W.1. Again she says that she saw three persons beating P.W. 1 and P.W.2 and that one person stood outside the house. She has identified appellants 1 to 3 as the persons who beat P.W.1 and P.W.2. Similarly P.W.4 has stated that on the date of incident they heard the cries from the house of P.W.1 and immediately rushed there and P.W.1 and P.W.2 were being beaten with hands and legs by four persons. P.W.4 also has identified appellants 1 to 3 as the persons who beat P.W.1 and P.W.2 P.W.3 and P.W.4 have stated even in their chief-examination that they did not know A1 to A3. Thus they have no prior acquaintance with appellants. Their identification before the court for the first time is of no value in the absence of a prior test identification parade. Moreover there is a serious discrepancy in the evidence of P.W.3 and P.W.4. P.W. 3 has stated that she saw three persons i.e. appellants beating P.W.1 and P.W.2 and that one person stood outside the house. On the other hand, P.W.4 states that there were two male persons and two female persons and that all of them beat P.W.1 and P.W.2 with hands and legs. In view of such discrepancies in the evidence of P.W.3 and P.W.4, I am of the opinion that no weight can be attached to their evidence.
The Judgment of the lower appellate Court does not suffer from any perverse findings, and is in accordance with law and the same need not be interfered with. Hence, the Judgment of the lower appellate Court in acquitting the accused is hereby confirmed. The criminal appeal fails and is liable to be dismissed.
The Criminal Appeal is accordingly dismissed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending in this appeal, shall stand dismissed.
JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO 14.07.2014 pln