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

2024 Supreme(Telangana) 1153

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K. SURENDER, J. ANIL KUMAR, JJ.
Anupuram Ramachandri @ Ramachandraiah - Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1184 of 2015
Decided On : 17-10-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : T. Anirudh Reddy, T. Pradyumna Kumar Reddy
For the Respondent: Arun Kumar Doddla

The reliability of child witness testimony is crucial and must be scrutinized carefully; corroborative evidence is essential for convicting based on such testimony, especially when significant inconsistencies arise.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Conviction for murder - Appeal against severe conviction resulting in life imprisonment - Prosecution alleged the appellants attacked the deceased upon her refusal for sexual intercourse, leading to death - Evidence relied upon primarily from a child witness - Concerns raised around the reliability of child testimony and evidence corroboration - Court underscored the necessity of caution while scrutinizing child witness accounts. (Paras 1, 10, 12, 20)

(B) Child Witness - Provisions under the Oaths Act and Evidence Act regarding administration of oath and credibility of child witnesses - Court emphasizes that corroboration of child witness testimony is a measure of caution, with no absolute rule against its admissibility, though evidence must be scrupulously examined for potential tutoring. (Paras 12, 18)

Facts of the case:
The appellants were accused of murdering a woman after she refused to engage in sexual acts with them. The witnesses, particularly a child witness, provided conflicting accounts of the incident and the prosecution's case heavily relied on her testimony to establish the occurrence of the crime. (Paras 2, 10, 20)

Findings of Court:
Evidence from the child witness was deemed unreliable, leading to the conclusion that there was no other evidence to substantiate the prosecution's case against the appellants, resulting in the reversal of conviction. The principle of benefit of doubt applies, leading to the ordered release of the appellants. (Paras 19, 21)

Issues: The main issues revolved around the credibility of the child witness testimony and the sufficiency of evidence to convict the appellants. (Paras 11, 20)

Ratio Decidendi: The Court found that the prosecution had failed to provide credible proof of the accused's involvement, specifically due to the inconsistencies and unreliability of the child witness's account, resulting in the extension of the benefit of doubt to the appellants. (Paras 19, 20)

Result: Criminal Appeal is allowed; conviction and sentence of life imprisonment set aside.

Table of Content
1. facts surrounding the incident and prosecution case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
2. challenges to the credibility of the child's testimony. (Para 10 , 11 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 19)
3. judicial scrutiny of child witness evidence. (Para 12 , 20)
4. outcome of the appeal and release of appellants. (Para 21)

JUDGMENT :

K. SURENDER, J.

1. Both the appellants who are arrayed as accused Nos. 1 and 2 were convicted by the learned Sessions Judge for the offence under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. Questioning the said conviction, the present appeal is preferred.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 20.11.2012, in the evening, accused Nos.1 and 2 went to the house of the deceased and asked her to participate in sexual intercourse with them. However, when the deceased refused, there was a quarrel and accused No.2 caught hold the deceased and accused No.1 hit her with a stick on her left eye and also pierced the stick into her vagina. Due to which, she died.

3. A complaint was filed by PW1 who is the mother of the deceased on 21.11.2012 at 10:00 A.M. In the complaint, she narrated that her sister namely Sugunamma/PW2 informed about the death of the deceased and accordingly, when she went to the house at around 07:00 A.M., she found that the deceased was lying in one of the rooms with injuries and was dead. She came to know that accused Nos.1 and 2 went to the house and a quarrel took place between them and accused Nos.1 and 2 killed her. The dead body was found without clothes and with injuries to the eye.

4. Having received the complaint, Police registered a case against the appellants for the offence under Section 302 read with 34 of IPC and commenced investigation. They went to the scene of offence and panchanama proceedings/Ex.P3 was conducted. Thereafter, inquest proceedings were undertaken under Ex.P5. After inquest proceedings, the body was sent for post-mortem examination. The Doctor who conducted post-mortem examination on the body of deceased found following injuries:-

1. Laceration of Left Upper eye lid 4 x 3 cm with depression and rupture of eye brow.

2. Laceration of left lower eye lid 4 x 3 cms with tear with inner campus of eye lid.

3. Abrasion over back of left elbow in lower 1/3rd of arm 1 x 1 cm.

4. Abrasion over front right knee about 1 x 1 cm.

5. Tearing of posterior commission of vegina 2 cms. Deep x bleeding explosing muscles.

6. Multiple small abrasions of ½ cms over front of upper part of thigh.

7. Contusion of 5 x 3 cms. Over front of left side of neck just above clavity. Abrasions are bright red in colour

5. According to PW9/Doctor, after receiving the analysis report, he opined that the cause of death of deceased was due to multiple injuries and there was a possibility that victim was subjected to rape.

6. During the course of investigation, the accused were arrested on 26.11.2012. Pursuant to their confession, stick that was used in the commission of offence was recovered at the instance of accused.

7. Having concluded the investigation, the Police filed charge sheet against the appellants. Charges under Section 302 read with 34 of IPC were framed against the accused Nos.1 and 2 by learned Sessions Judge.

8. During the course of trial, on behalf of the prosecution, PWs.1 to 12, Exs.P1 to P12 and Material Objects i.e., MOs.1 to 5 are marked.

9. Learned Sessions Judge mainly relied on the evidence of PW3, who is the daughter of the deceased to record conviction. According to the learned Sessions Judge, the evidence of PW3 corroborated with the injuries that were found by the Doctor/PW9, who conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of deceased.

10. According to PW3, on the date of incident, she found accused Nos.1 and 2 consuming alcohol with her mother when she came from school at around 03:00 P.M. PW3 informed that she was having head ache and her mother asked her to go and sleep in the bed room. When PW3 was sleeping she heard accused Nos.1 and 2 shout

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