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

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 34711

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
K SURESH REDDY,SUMATHI JAGADAM
P.CHANDRAIAH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF AP – Respondent
CRLA 188/2019



##PAGE1##

Date of reserved for orders : 12.08.2026 Date of pronouncement : 15.09.2026 Date of uploading : 16.09.2026 APHC010067432019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3596]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY, THE 15th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 188/2019 Between:

1. P.CHANDRAIAH, PERUMALLAPALLY VILALGE, PELLAKURU MANDAL, NELLORE ...APELLANT AND

1. STATE OF AP, high court of Ap, Amaravathi ...RESPODENT Appeal under Section 372/374(2)/378(4) of Cr.P.C praying that the High Court may be pleased to aggrieved by the judgment dated 17-07-2018 passed by the VII Additional Sessions judge, Gudur in Sc. 288/2014 IA NO: 1 OF 2019 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to condone the delay of 181 days in filing Crl.appeal against the judgment dated 17-07-2018 in Sc.

288/2014 passed by the VII Addl. Sessions judge, Gudur IA NO: 2 OF 2019 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the sentence dated 17- 07-2018 in Sc. 288/2014 passed by the VII Addl. Sessions judge, Gudur by enlarging the petitioner/accused on bail Counsel for the Appellant:

##PAGE2##

1. A GAYATRI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent:

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

This Court made the following:

##PAGE3##

JUDGMENT: (Per Hon'ble Smt. Justice Sumathi Jagadam)

Appellant in this Criminal Appeal is sole accused in Sessions Case No.288 of 2014 on the file of the Court of VII Additional Sessions Judge, Gudur (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned Sessions Judge').

2. The accused was tried by the learned Sessions Judge under the following charges:

1st charge was under Section 448 IPC, 2nd charge was under Section 342 IPC, 3rd charge was under Section 376 IPC, and

4th charge was under Section 302 IPC.

3. Substance of the charge is that on 15.07.2004 at about 10.00 a.m. the accused trespassed into the house of the deceased, wrongfully confined the minor girl, namely, Bommilla Padmavathi (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”), by closing and bolting the doors of the house from inside, and committed rape upon her. Apprehending that the deceased might complain to her parents, the accused poured kerosene on her and set her on fire, thereby committed offences punishable under Sections 448, 342, 376 and

302 of IPC.

##PAGE4##

4. After completion of trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the accused under Section 448 IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for one year. He was further convicted under Section 342 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for six months. He was further convicted under Section 376 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. The learned Additional Sessions Judge also convicted him under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

5. Case of the prosecution, briefly, is as follows:

The accused is a resident of Perumallapalli Village, Pellakur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. The deceased was also a resident of the same village. The deceased was studying 8th class in Z.P. High School, Srikalahasti, by staying in a Girls Hostel. She went to her house at Perumalapalli on 14.07.2004 to collect money from her father to purchase uniform and books. On 15.07.2004, the father of the deceased went out, saying that he would arrange money by evening. The deceased's mother also went for coolie work. Noticing that the deceased was alone at her house, while she was cooking, the accused entered the house, wrongfully conf

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top