SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1961 Supreme(AP) 18

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : ANANTA NARAYANA AYYAR
Macherla Kondaiah - Appellant
Versus
Ede Venkataratnam - Respondent
Decided On : 01-26-61

A person who helps to continue a preliminary register case after the death of the original complainant is not a complainant within the meaning of section 417 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code and, therefore, is not competent to file an appeal against the acquittal.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 417 (3), CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE - INTERPRETATION - WHO IS A COMPLAINANT - WHETHER A PERSON WHO HELPS TO CONTINUE A PRELIMINARY REGISTER CASE AFTER THE DEATH OF THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINANT IS A COMPLAINANT - HELD, NO.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant, Macherla China Kondaiah, filed a private complaint in a preliminary register case relating to cognizable offenses, some of which could not be lawfully compounded. After the death of the original complainant, Macherla Peda Kondaiah, the appellant continued to prosecute the case. The learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted all the accused. The appellant filed an appeal against the acquittal under section 417 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the appellant was not a complainant within the meaning of section 417 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code and, therefore, was not competent to file an appeal against the acquittal. The court found that the appellant did not file the original complaint and that his helping to continue the preliminary register case after the death of the original complainant did not make him a complainant.

Issues: 1. Whether the appellant was a complainant within the meaning of section 417 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code? 2. Whether the appellant was competent to file an appeal against the acquittal?

Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the word "complainant" in section 417 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code to mean the person who filed the original complaint and instituted the case. The court held that a person who helps to continue a preliminary register case after the death of the original complainant is not a complainant within the meaning of section 417 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal.

( 1 ) ONE Macherla Peda Kondaiah filed a Private complaint in P. R. C. No. 2 of 1958 on the file of the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Rcpalle. Subsequently, he died. His brother, Macherla China Kondaiah (P. W. 1) continued to prosecute the case. Ultimately, the learned Magistrate committed 26 accused in that case to the Sessions Court, Guntur Division, for trial. The learned Additional sessions Judge, Guntur, framed 36 charges against the 26 accused in Sessions case No. 48 of 1958 on his file. After full trial in that case, the learned Additional sessions Judge acquitted everyone of the accused of all the charges framed against him. Mecherla China Kondaiah was examined as P. W. 1 in that case. He filed c. M. P. No. 203 of 1959 in this Court for leave to file an appeal against the order of acquittal. Special leave was granted by an order of this Court dated 24th february, 1959 and the appeal filed by him was taken on file as Criminal Appeal no. 231 of 1959. No appeal was filed by the State against the acquittal of any of the accused.

( 2 ) THE prosecution examined 30 witnesses and marked documents, Exhibits P-1 to P-58. The prosecution story was briefly to the following effect. Ilavaram is a village which is a few miles from Repalle. The prevailing community in that village consists of Padma Saleelu who were about 3,000 strong. Yadavas and Gowdas form a small minority numbering about 200 or 300. In the elections during the year 1952, Padma Saleelu (weavers) supported the Congress party whereas the Yadavas, and Gowdas supported the Communist party. Subsequently, in the year 1955, the Padma Saleelu got a drama called sasirekhaparinayam enacted in which there was some comic scene introduced which reflected badly on the Yadavas who were referred to as Gollas and whose ancestry was mentioned to be as uncertain as that of their sheep. The Yadavas felt it to be a great insult. Sub-equently, the Padma Saleelu enacted some other drama. A-14, who is a yadava, filed a petition before the Magistrate for stopping the performance of an play (drama) called Kalidasu . In due course, this petition reached the Sub-Inspector of Police who investigated into it. In the morning of 2ist December, 1955, the sub-Inspector camped at Vellatur, sent for the Padma Saleelu as well as Yadavas and took an undertaking from the Padma Saleelu not to humiliate the Yadavas any further. The very next day, a big rioting took place in the village in which two groups, viz. , Padma Saleelu on one side and Yadavas and Gowdas on the other, had a clash with the result that several people on both sides got injured. The party of Yadavas and Gowdas were the aggressors. They attacked the Padma Saleelu and injured a number of them. The Padma Saleelu acted in exercise of their right of private defence. In the course of the attack, A-I4 beat P. W. 26 causing very severe injuries. The doctor (P. W. 29) in charge of the hospital at Repalle, examined the injured and issued wound certificates for the following injured persons : (a) P. Ws. 1 to 15 and 26 ; (b) A-4, A-5, A-8, A-13, A-I5- A-18, A-19, A-20, A-21, A-22, A-23 ; (c) D. Ws. 2, 5, 8 and one Tata Raghavulu who had penetrating stab wound few inches below the chest as a result of which he later died.

( 3 ) THE Village Munsif (P. W. 28) sent the report, Exhibit P-1, to the police station. On receipt of it, the Head Constable (P. W. 30) went to the village. He found A-22 and A-23 injured and sent them to the hospital. The Circle Inspector who came to the village the same day investigated the case. He examined P. Ws. i, 15 and 26 and sent them to the hospital. He, however, was not examined as a witness because, at the time of the trial, he was blind and he was unable to examine and identify the persons. P. W. 26, Bhattu Kotaiah, is an old man of 70 years. His brother died on 21st december, 1955. On the next day, i. e. , 22nd December, 1955, he went out from his house to secure vegetables for performing the second-day




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top