THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.104 of 2008 09-09-2014 BETWEEN:
Gunturi Gnanaprakash …..Appellant/Accused AND State of A.P., Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for The State of Telangana and the State of A.P., …..Respondent THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING JUDGMENT:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.104 of 2008 JUDGMENT:
This Criminal Appeal is preferred by the appellant/accused against the Judgment dated 09.01.2008 passed in S.C.No.346 of 2006 by the Sessions Judge, Nellore, whereby the learned Judge convicted the appellant/accused for the offence under Section 304 Part-I IPC and accordingly sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years.
The case of the prosecution is as follows:
That the deceased was the wife of the accused and their marriage was performed about eight years prior to the occurrence. The accused, suspecting the character of the deceased, was harassing her. Four months prior to the incident, they have shifted their residence to Kavali. There was no change in the attitude of the accused and his brother. On the intervening night of 5/6.12.2005, while the deceased was sleeping with her children, the accused beat the deceased with axe and caused bleeding injuries and the deceased died instantaneously. Therefore, P.W.6, elder son of the deceased and the accused, went to P.W.2 and informed her about the incident. She, in turn, informed P.W.1 and the neighbours also gathered. P.W.1 and P.W.2 made searches for the accused and the accused was found in the company of his younger brother near STD booth of P.W.4 and when questioned, the accused gave a voluntary confessional statement of committing the murder and he was taken to P.W.8 before whom he gave an extra judicial confession and he forwarded the accused to the police along with the complaint. Thereafter, the above complaint was registered and was investigated. After completion of the investigation, police filed charge sheet against the sole accused for the offence under Section 302 IPC.
To prove the guilt of the accused, P.Ws.1 to 12 were examined and Exs.P.1 to P.9 and M.Os.1 and 2 were marked on behalf of the prosecution. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the accused.
On appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found the appellant/accused not guilty for the offence under Section 302 IPC. However, the trial Court found the accused guilty for the offence under Section 304 Part-I IPC and accordingly sentenced him as stated above. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is preferred by the appellant/accused.
Heard and perused the records.
After evaluating and examining the material available on record and considering the submissions of the learned counsel, this Court is of the view that there are no special or adequate reasons, warranting interference by this Court with the Judgment passed by the trial Court.
At this stage, the learned counsel for the appellant/accused confines his argument with regard to quantum of sentence, and submits that as the appellant/accused is aged about fifty years and he is having so many ailments and he is the only breadwinner in his family, lenient view may be taken by this Court while imposing sentence of imprisonment.
Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant/accused and also in view of long lapse of time, this Court is inclined to take a lenient view.
In the result, the conviction recorded by the trial Court against the appellant/accused for the offence under Section 304 Part-I IPC is hereby confirmed. However, this Court, taking a lenient view, modifies and reduces the sentence of imprisonment, to the period, which the appellant/accused has already undergone.
The Criminal Appeal is accordingly partly allowed. Consequently, the miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this appeal, shall stand closed.
JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO 09.09.2014 pln