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

2025 Supreme(AP) 453

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
K. SURESH REDDY, K. SREENIVASA REDDY, JJ.
The State Of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati, through Deputy Superintendent of Police, Disha Women Police Station – Petitioner
Versus
Kunchala Sasi Krishna, S/o. Guravaih – Respondent 
Criminal Appeal No.190 Of 2022 & R.T. No.1 Of 2022 
Decided On : 31-01-2025 

Advocates:
Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh

The court ruled that the death penalty is an exception, emphasizing the need for considering the possibility of reformation and rehabilitation of the accused, leading to a modification of the sentence to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302 and 354D - Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 - Sections 3(2)(va) and 3(2)(v) - Conviction for murder and stalking - Accused convicted and sentenced to death for murder, with additional sentences for stalking and SC/ST Act violations - Evidence from eyewitnesses and CCTV footage corroborated prosecution's case - Death sentence modified to 20 years rigorous imprisonment based on mitigating circumstances including age and lack of prior criminal history. (Paras 2, 22, 34)

(B) Sentencing - Death penalty - Court emphasized that death penalty is an exception and should only be imposed in rarest of rare cases, considering the possibility of reformation and rehabilitation of the accused. (Paras 22, 30, 31)

JUDGMENT :

(K. Sreenivasa Reddy, J.)

The appellant herein is the accused in Sessions Case No.85/S/2021 on the file of the Special Sessions Judge- cum-IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Guntur (hereinafter referred to, as ‘the Sessions Judge’).

2. The appellant/accused was tried for the offences punishable under Sections 354D and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’) and Sections 3 (2) (va) and 3 (2) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 (for short, ‘the Act, 2015’). Vide the impugned judgment dated 29.04.2022 in the aforesaid Sessions Case, the Sessions Judge found the appellant/accused guilty of the aforesaid charges, accordingly convicted him and sentenced -to death penalty by way of hanging by neck till he is dead and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month, for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, subject to confirmation by this Court under Section 366 CrPC; to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 15 days, for the offence punishable under Section 354D IPC; to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of 15 days for the offence under Section 3 (2) (v) of the Act, 2015; and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of 15 days for the offence under Section 3 (2) (va) of the Act, 2015.

3. The substance of charges as against the accused is that on 15.08.2021 at about 9.40 am, in front of Sri Srinivasa Vilas Hotel, Kakani Road, Paramayakunta of Guntur town, the accused assaulted by stalking Nallapu Ramya (hereinafter referred to, as ‘the deceased’) viz. interacted/contacted her repeatedly despite her clear indication of disinterest and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 354D IPC; that on the same date, time and place and during the course of same transaction, the accused committed murder by intentionally causing death of the deceased by means of stabbing her on her stomach, chest and back indiscriminately with a knife and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC; that on the same date, time and place and during the course of same transaction, the accused, not being a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, committed the abovesaid offence under Section 354D IPC knowing that the deceased is a member of Scheduled Caste-Mala and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 3 (2) (va) of the Act, 2015; and lastly, that on the same date, time and place and during the course of same transaction, the accused committed the abovesaid offence punishable under Section 302 IPC knowing that the deceased is a Scheduled Caste-Mala community and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 3 (2) (v) of the Act, 2015.

4. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:

(a) P.W.1 is father of the deceased. P.W.2 is mother of the deceased. P.W.3 is sister of the deceased. According to P.W.3, she knew the accused as she had seen him in instagram app shown to her by the deceased. P.W.3 and the deceased were residing in the house of their grandmother L.W.4-N.Pushpa Leela and were studying in St.Mary’s Group of Institutions. The deceased was studying III year B.Tech. in St. Mary’s Engineering College. Their parents were residing in Chilumuru village of Kolluru mandal by doing cultivation. P.Ws.1 and 2 used to visit them once in two or three days. On 14.08.2021, during night, the deceased showed profile photo of the accused in instagram app and informed P.W.3 that the accused, being resident of Mutluru village and Vaddera community person, was troubling her and was insisting her to love him and he was also threatening that if she does not love him, he would kill her. On that,

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top