IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
K. SURESH REDDY, B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI, JJ.
Bada Padmasri @ Padma & Others – Appellants
Versus
The State Of AP Rep By Its Pp Hyd – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.529 Of 2013, Criminal Appeal No. 569 Of 2013
Decided On : 28-03-2024
JUDGMENT :
(B.V.L.N. Chakravarthi, J.)
1. Heard Sri Sayed Sardar Saheb Akil, learned counsel for the appellant/A-1, Smt.A.Gayathri Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant/A-5 in Crl.A.No.529/2013, and Sri C.Sharan Reddy, learned counsel for appellants/A-7 and A-9 in Crl.A.No.569/2013 and Sri S.Dushyanth Reddy, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for respondent/State.
2. The appeal vide CRL.A.No.529/2013 is filed for A-1, A-2, A-3 and A-5. The appeal vide CRL.A.No.569/2013 is filed for A-7 and A-9. Both the appeals arose from the judgment dated 26.06.2013passed in S.C.No.420/2010 on the file of the learned I Addl.District & Sessions Judge, Guntur (hereinafter referred to as ‘trial Court’).
3. The appellants/A-2 and A-3 died pending appeal. Therefore, case against A-2 and A-3 abated as per order of this Court.
4. The accused No.1 was tried and convicted by the trial Court for the offence U/s.372, 366-A, 343 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity ‘I.P.C.’). A-1 was also tried and convicted for the offence U/s.3, 4, 5, 6 and7 (1) (A) of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (for brevity IT(P) Act,1956) and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for six months for the offence U/s.372 IPC; suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for six months for the offence U/s.366-A IPC; to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only), in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for two months for the offence U/s.343 IPC; to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only), in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month for the offence U/s.3 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956; to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only), in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month for the offence U/s.4 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956; to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 14 years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only), in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month for the offence U/s.5 (1) (a to d) proviso (ii) of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956; to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only), in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month for the offence U/s.6 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956; to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for three months for the offence U/s.7(1)(A) of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.
(a) A-5 was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only), in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month for the offence U/s.3 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956; to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only), in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month for the offence U/s.4 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956; to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 14 years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only), in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month for the offence U/s.5 (1) (a to d); proviso (ii) Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956; to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only), in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for onemonth for the offence U/s.6 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956; to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for three months for the
The prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt in cases of trafficking and sexual assault, especially when serious allegations are involved.
The court established that corroborative evidence is essential in sexual assault cases, and the absence of such evidence led to the acquittal of one accused and the modification of the sentence for t....
The court affirmed convictions for human trafficking and sexual offences against a minor, ruling that the trial was fair despite minor procedural errors, emphasized the gravity of abetting prostituti....
Section 366-A of IPC is aggravated form of kidnapping – Offence of kidnapping punishable under Section 363 of IPC is a minor offence when compared to Section 366-A of IPC.
Bail – Person accused of offence under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 should not be released on bail unless mandatory conditions provided under Section 45 of Act, 2002 are satisfied.
Uncorroborated testimonies from child witnesses are insufficient for conviction; careful scrutiny and corroboration are required to uphold the integrity of justice in sexual offences.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.