Back
2020 Supreme(Telangana) 87
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K. LAKSHMAN, J.
Kamatham Sayamma – Appellant
Versus
The State of A.P., - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.968 of 2006
Decided on : 12-06-2020
Point of Law :
Circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be in the first instance be fully established and all the facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused. There must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for a conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and it must be such as to show that within all human probability the act must have been done by the accused.
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code Sections 302 and 120-B and 404 - Offence of Murder - Appeal against conviction - Conspiracy -Deceased was having an extra marital relationship with accused No.1 for about 20 years. She used to meet accused No.1 mostly at Jadcherla and used to spend with him. Accused No.4 - a widow, used to move with the deceased and she is also having an illegal intimacy with Accused No.3 - Deceased addicted to all bad habits, like drinking toddy and illicit liquor in the company of accused Nos.1, 3 and 4. It is relevant to note that accused Nos.1 to 4 are also having said all bad habits
Finding of the Court:
Accused and the deceased hail from rural area, poor families and they are illiterates. They were addicted to intoxication and other bad habits, like illicit relations etc. in the manner stated above. It is a classic case of people hails from rural background, living in poverty and illiterates, suffering from various social evils, like intoxication, poverty, illiteracy etc. As discussed above, the deceased and the accused were in intoxication condition, accused No.1 was having illegal intimacy with the deceased for the last 20 years, accused No.3 is having illegal intimacy with accused No.4. All of them were eking out their livelihood as coolies/daily wage labour. They have committed the said offences in the said circumstances and in the intoxication condition. Therefore, this Court is inclined to modify the sentence imposed by the trial Court.
Result: Criminal Appeal is allowed
JUDGMENT:
Feeling aggrieved by the judgment, dated 11.07.2006, passed by the Special Judge for the trail of Offences under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act - cum - VI Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Secunderabad in Sessions Case No.333 of 2005, the appellant - Accused No.2 preferred the present appeal.
2. Vide the aforesaid judgment, the trial Court found the appellant - accused No.2 guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 304 Part - II and 379 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and she was convicted and sentenced to undergo five (05) years Rigorous Imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part - II. She was further sentenced to undergo one (01) year rigorous imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 379 of IPC. The trial Court ordered to run both the sentences of imprisonment concurrently. It is relevant to note that the appellant - Accused No.2 was also charged for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 120-B and 404 of IPC, but she was acquitted of the said charges.
3. The deceased - Smt. Mangani Savithramma was having an extra marital relationship with accused No.1 for about 20 years. She used to meet accused No.1 mostly at Jadcherla and used to spend with him. Accused No.4 - Smt. Balamani, a widow, used to move with the deceased and she is also having an illegal intimacy with Accused No.3 - Pole Shivaiah. The deceased addicted to all bad habits, like drinking toddy and illicit liquor in the company of accused Nos.1, 3 and 4. It is relevant to note that accused Nos.1 to 4 are also having said all bad habits.
4. The deceased also used to quarrel frequently with her mother demanding the pension amount of her father to meet her expenses. Since about two years, the deceased reduced meeting accused No.1, upon which accused No.1 became wild against the deceased.
5. On 07.04.2005 in the morning, the deceased left her house and went to Badepalli on the pretext of getting treatment for her wound in Government Hospital. She met Accused No.4 and both of them went to the house of her mother (PW.2) and argued with her mother about pension amount. The deceased also demanded PW.2, her mother to give some amount to meet her expenditure. Thereafter, the deceased met accused Nos.2 and 4 in the evening at Subhash Chowk and all of them went to the toddy shop.
6. On the same day i.e., 07.04.2005 at about 7.30 p.m., accused No.1 went to Badepalli and met the deceased, Smt. Golla Parwathama, accused Nos.2 and 3 at Subhash Chowk. Then accused No.1 bought half bottle whisky from nearby Wine Shop i.e., Sri Venkateshwara Wine Shop, in which PW.10 was working, took all of them to Moosa Toddy compound wherein all of them consumed the whisky. At about 8.30 p.m., accused No.3 met his concubine - Accused No.4 and pressurized accused No.1 to provide whisky. Then, accused No.1 purchased two quarter bottles of whisky and asked them to accompany him to railway track to have whisky. Then, PW.5 - Golla Parwathamma returned to her house, while Accused Nos.1 to 4 and the deceased went along with railway track and halted at Km.No.94/9-12 behind Raghavendra Threatre, where accused Nos.1 and 2 and the deceased sat at one place and accused Nos.3 and 4 sat just away to them and started taking whisky. The deceased was in highly intoxicated condition and was out of mood to share the lust with accused No.1. Taking advantage of her condition, accused No.1 tried to lure accused No.2 and asked her to cooperate with him. Then, Accused No.2 refused to fulfill his desire on a plea that he is having illegal intimacy with the deceased for last about 20 years. At that particular point of time, accused No.1 expressed his anguish over the deceased as she was being away to him for the last two years and moving on her own accord and bore grudge against her and waiting for opportunity to see the end of the deceased.
7. Accused No.1 promised to do away with the life of the deceased and to give
