Back
2020 Supreme(AP) 611
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATI
U. Durga Prasad Rao, Ninala Jayasurya, JJ.
Gunnapu Lakshmanarao - Appellant
Versus
State Of Andhra Pradesh - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1062 of 2014
Decided On : 11-11-2020
A. Gayatri Reddy, Advocate
The court reiterated the principle of 'res gestae' and the admissibility of evidence under Section 6 of the Indian Evidence Act, as well as the legal maxim 'nemo moriturus praesumitur mentire' and the principle of dying declarations under Section 32 of the Evidence Act. The court also held that voluntary drunkenness is not an excusable act under law for acquittal.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 498-A, 302 IPC - HOMICIDAL DEATH - BURNS INJURIES - DYING DECLARATIONS - ADMISSIBILITY - CONVICTION - FACTUAL AND LEGAL SUSTAINABILITY - VOLUNTARY DRUNKENNESS - EXCUSABLE ACT - INTERPRETATION OF EVIDENCE ACT, SECTION 6, 32 - RELEVANCE OF RES GESTAE - PRINCIPLE OF NEMO MORITURUS PRAESUMITUR MENTIRE - LEGAL MAXIM - INTERPRETATION OF INDIAN PENAL CODE, SECTIONS 498-A, 302 - ANALYSIS OF JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS - FINAL DECISION: CONVICTION AND SENTENCE UPHELD, APPEAL DISMISSED.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the offences under Sections 498-A and 302 IPC for causing the death of his wife by setting her ablaze. The deceased had sustained burn injuries at her house and succumbed to injuries while undergoing treatment. The prosecution relied on the dying declarations of the deceased, recorded by two learned Magistrates, and the evidence of neighbors who witnessed the incident.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the deceased met with homicidal death due to burn injuries. The evidence of neighbors, admissible under the principle of 'res gestae', established the presence of the accused at the scene of the offence. The court also relied on the two dying declarations of the deceased, recorded by learned Magistrates, which were found to be free from prompting or tutoring. The court held that the accused was responsible for causing the death of his wife by setting her ablaze and that voluntary drunkenness was not an excusable act.
Issues: 1. Whether the deceased met with homicidal death on account of receiving burn injuries? 2. If point No.1 is held affirmatively, whether the appellant-accused is responsible for her death and whether the prosecution could prove his guilt beyond all reasonable doubt? 3. Whether the judgment of the trial Court in convicting the accused is factually and legally sustainable?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the deceased met with homicidal death due to burn injuries based on the evidence of neighbors, admissible under the principle of 'res gestae', which established the presence of the accused at the scene of the offence, and the two dying declarations of the deceased, recorded by learned Magistrates, which were found to be free from prompting or tutoring. 2. The court held that the accused was responsible for causing the death of his wife by setting her ablaze based on the dying declarations of the deceased, which were consistent and corroborated by the evidence of neighbors. The court also held that voluntary drunkenness was not an excusable act. 3. The court held that the judgment of the trial Court in convicting the accused was factually and legally sustainable based on the evidence on record and the applicable legal principles.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court.
JUDGMENT
U.Durga Prasad Rao, J. - Aggrieved by the judgment dated 28.12.2012 in Sessions Case No.102/2012 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, West Godavari Division at Eluru convicting the accused for the offences under Sections 498-A and 302 IPC and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- for the offence under Section 302 IPC and further sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- for the offence under Section 498-A IPC, this Criminal Appeal is filed by the sole appellant/accused.
2. The facts in brief, which lead to file this Criminal Appeal, can be stated succinctly thus:
(a) The accused and the deceased-Gunnapu Bhavani had a love affair and married about four years prior to her death that occurred on 01.11.2011. By the date of offence, they had a son-Sai Sandeep aged about 11/2 years. The accused was an Auto Driver and the couple was living in a rented house in Pamula Dibba, R.R.Pet, Eluru. The prosecution case is that after the birth of son-Sandeep, the accused addicted to vices like consuming liquor and torturing the deceased suspecting her fidelity.
(b) On 18.10.2011, at about 02:00 p.m. the accused went to his house in a drunken state of mind and beat his son on the allegation that he was not born to him and when the deceased questioned his high handed behavior, the accused grew wild and beat her black-and-blue. Due to pains, the deceased went to nearby medical shop to get medicine; the accused followed her and dragged her to home by beating her and bolted the doors from inside, poured kerosene and set her ablaze with an intent to kill her. Unable to bear burns, the deceased opened doors and came out of the house shouting for help. The neighbous-P.Ws.2, 5 and others rushed there and doused flames. In the meanwhile, P.W.1-elder sister of the deceased and her father also rushed there and all of them took her to Government Headquarters Hospital, Eluru and admitted her. Upon receiving Ex.P.9- Hospital intimation, P.W.14/learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Special Court for Excise, Eluru proceeded to Hospital and recorded Ex.P.12/dying declaration of the deceased. Upon intimation, P.W.11/Head Constable, Out Post Police Station, General Hospital, Eluru, went and recorded Ex.P.4/Statement of the deceased and thereafter, on 18.10.2011, a case in Crime No.306/2011 was registered for the offences under Sections 498-A and 307 IPC on the file of II town Police Station, Eluru and investigated into by P.W.9.
(c) Pending investigation, the deceased was shifted to Government General Hospital, Vijayawada for Expert's treatment on 19.10.2011. Whereupon receiving hospital intimation, P.W.15-III Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada, recorded dying declaration of the deceased in the Government General Hospital, Vijayawada under Ex.P.14. While undergoing treatment, the deceased succumbed to injuries and died on 01.11.2011 at 03:20 a.m. and basing on her death intimation, P.W.10-S.I. of Police, II town Police Station, Eluru altered section of Law from Section 498-A and 307 IPC to Section 498-A and 302 IPC on 01.11.2011 and after completion of investigation, P.W.12-Inspector of Police, Town Circle, Eluru filed charge sheet against the accused.
(d) On appearance of the accused, the trial Court framed charges under Sections 498-A and 302 IPC against the accused, who denied the same and claimed to be tried.
(e) During the course of trial, P.Ws.1 to 16 were examined and Exs.P.1 to P.14 were marked and M.Os.1 and 2 were exhibited on behalf of the prosecution. On behalf of the Accused, Ex.D.1 was marked. Accused did not adduce any oral evidence.
(f) Upon hearing arguments of both sides, the trial Court mainly relying upon Exs.P.12 and P.14-dying declarations of the deceased recorded by the learned Magistrates, wherein, the deceased stated that the accused set her ablaze, and also considering the other relevant supporting evidence, held that the accused
