Back
2024 Supreme(Telangana) 1189
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA, HYDERABAD
K. SURENDER, J. ANIL KUMAR, JJ.
Govindaram Kanakaiah, S/o Narsaiah - Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.1315 of 2016
Decided on : 21-11-2024
For the Appellant : Sri. M. Venkat Reddy Kodumury
For the Respondent: Sri. Arun Kumar Doddla
Life imprisonment under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act is not applicable if the offence under the IPC carries a maximum penalty of 10 years; the derived sentence must comply with statutory definitions.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 302 and 304-II - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 3(2)(v) - The appellant was convicted under Section 304-II for the murder of his wife, with life imprisonment initially imposed under the Act, later found not applicable due to sentencing constraints - The learned Sessions Judge erred in applying Section 3(2)(v) since the offence under Section 304-II carries a maximum penalty of 10 years, not 10 years or more - The prosecution did not appeal the acquittal under Section 302, thus its finding stands - Imprisonment under Section 304-II is upheld, while the life sentence under the Act is quashed. (Paras 1-10)
Facts of the case:
The appellant set his wife on fire after pouring kerosene due to a domestic dispute; she succumbed to her injuries the next day, prompting charges of attempted murder that were later upgraded to murder post her death.
Findings of Court:
The life imprisonment sentence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act was not justified due to the nature of the offence defined under IPC Section 304-II.
Issues: The key issues involved the applicability of Section 3(2)(v) of the Act given the sentencing limits of IPC Section 304-II.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the application of Section 3(2)(v) was erroneous as the offence was not punishable for a term exceeding ten years, thus not satisfying the necessary conditions under the Act.
Result: Criminal Appeal partly allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of the appellant's conviction and offenses. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. counsel representation for both parties. (Para 2) |
| 3. analysis of sentencing under ipc and the act. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. erroneous sentencing under the act corrected. (Para 10) |
| 5. conclusion on appeal decision. (Para 11) |
JUDGMENT :
K.Surender, J.
The appellant was tried for the offence under Section 302 of IPC for committing murder of his wife. However, since the learned Sessions Judge found that the offence falls within Section 304-II of IPC, he has sentenced the appellant to undergo 10 years imprisonment for the said offence. Further, the appellant was also convicted for the offence under Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘the Act’) and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment.
2. Heard learned legal aid counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent-State.
3. The facts of the case are that the appellant has poured kerosene on the deceased, who is his wife, belonging to SC community, on 07.08.2015, in the evening, when she refused to prepare Upma. She was set on fire and then taken to hospital. Initially, the case was registered under Section 307 of IPC. Thereafter, she died on the next day i.e., on 08.08.2015. Accordingly, Section of law was altered to 302 of IPC.
4. Having gone through the record, we do not find any reasons to interfere with the finding of the learned Sessions Judge, in convicting the appellant for the offence under Section 304-II of IPC. The prosecution also did not prefer any appeal against the acquittal of the appellant under Section 302 of IPC.
5. Imprisonment for life was inflicted on the basis of Section 3(2)(v) of the Act, which reads as under:
3. Punishments for offences of atrocities ---
(2) Whoever, not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe ---
(v) commits any offence under the INDIAN PENAL CODE (45 of 1860) punishable with imprisonment for a term of ten years of more against a person or property [knowing that such person is a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe or such property belongs to such member], shall be punishable with imprisonment for life and with fine.
6. The provision enables the Court to punish the person with imprisonment for life, when he commits any offence punishable under IPC with imprisonment for a term of 10 years or more, against the person or property, knowing that such person belongs to SC or ST caste.
7. The words used in the provision “punishable with the imprisonment for a term of 10 years or more” would imply that any offence committed and punishable under IPC, should be punishable with minimum of 10 years or more, it does not imply that offence which is punishable up to 10 years, would fall under the said provision of 3(2)(v) of the Act.
8. Section 304-II of IPC is punishable up to 10 years or fine. Unless any offence under IPC is punishable upto a minimum sentence of 10 years or above, the provision under Section 3(2)(v) of the Act, cannot be invoked.
9. Learned Sessions Judge had committed an error in concluding that appellant could be punished under Section 3(2)(v) of the Act, when he had recorded sentence of imprisonment of maximum 10 years under Section 304-II of IPC.
10. For the aforesaid reasons, the finding of the learned Sessions Judge is erroneous and accordingly, the sentence of life imprisonment imposed against the accused for the offence under Section 3(2)(v) of the Act, is hereby set aside. Insofar as the punishment under Section 304-II is confirmed. Since it is brought to the notice of this Court that the appellant has already served the sentence, the bail bonds against him shall stand cancelled.
11. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal is partly allowed.
