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

2016 Supreme(AP) 406

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY & M.S.K. JAISWAL, JJ.
Pathan Shafi – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Public Prosecutor – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 970 of 2010
Decided On : 11-04-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :A. Gayathri Reddy, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Public Prosecutor (AP).

Headnote:

Criminal Law – Criminal Trial – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – Offence of Murder – Appeal against conviction – Dying declaration – Prosecution is that the appellant/accused is the brother-in-law of wife of P.W.6. Appellant went to L.Ws.10, 11 and 13 and P.Ws.8 and 9, took their assistance by stating that P.W.10 came to the house of his brother – P.W.6 and was in company of his sister-in-law (the deceased) in the absence of her husband – Accused took L.Ws.10 and 11 and P.W.8 to the house of the deceased where they found P.W.10 in the company of the deceased – Appellant went to the house of the deceased from the front side of her house, by guarding L.W.10 and P.W.8 at the rear side and L.W.11 in front side of the house – After entering the house of the deceased, the appellant saw P.W.10 in the company of the deceased – Appellant tried to catch P.W.10, but he escaped from house by throwing accused from rear side door, by pushing L.Ws.10 and 11 and P.W.8 to a side, and ran away through Northern side Maize fields. L.Ws.10 and 11 and P.W.8 chased P.W.10 shouting ‘thief, thief..’ neighbours also chased P.W.10 but they could not catch him. As the appellant became angry over the deceased for her illicit intimacy with P.W.10, he poured kerosene with a plastic tin on the deceased and set fire to her with a matchstick. Resultantly, the deceased was gutted in flames and received severe burn injuries on her body – Thatched house of deceased was also completely burnt – Deceased came out from her house and raised alarm to protect herself by shouting that the appellant poured kerosene on her and set fire, and this was witnessed by the inmates and neighbours (L.Ws.7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19, and P.Ws.7, 8 and 9) – Recorded statement of victim while she was alive and registered the same as FIR– Held, law does not provide that the dying declaration should be made in a prescribed manner or in the form of questions and answers, and that the certification of the Doctor is a rule of caution. In the face of a specific Rule by the Criminal Rules of Practice in the form of Rule 33, which applies to the States of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, it is incumbent on the person who records the dying declaration to put preliminary questions in order to know the capability of the declarant to make a declaration – Absence of such preliminary questions having been put to the victim, though the declaration cannot per se be treated as invalid, it raises a serious suspicion on its genuineness. Having regard to the various suspicious features, as noted above, and in the light of the fact that all the material prosecution witnesses have turned hostile, the three declarations allegedly given by the deceased do not inspire confidence in the Court and it is wholly unsafe to convict the appellant based only on these declarations, when the nearest relations of the deceased, such as her father, brother, sister and her own husband, have themselves turned hostile, and none of them in any way implicated the appellant in the offence – Prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond all reasonable doubt and therefore the conviction and sentence of the appellant made by the lower Court cannot be sustained – Conviction and sentence recorded against the appellant/accused are set aside – Criminal Appeal is allowed.

Judgment :

C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.

1. This appeal is filed against judgment dated 26.2.2010, in S.C. No.378 of 2006, on the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru, whereby he has convicted the appellant – sole accused for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to suffer imprisonment for a period of six months.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the appellant/accused is the brother-in-law of one Pathan Vahida, wife of P.W.6. On 26.3.2006 at about 8.30 p.m., the appellant went to L.Ws.10, 11 and 13 and P.Ws.8 and 9, at Ganesh Colony, Chintalapudi, took their assistance by stating that P.W.10 came to the house of his brother – P.W.6 and was in the company of his sister-in-law (the deceased) in the absence of her husband. The accused took L.Ws.10 and 11 and P.W.8 to the house of the deceased where they found P.W.10 in the company of the deceased. The appellant went to the house of the deceased from the front side of her house, by guarding L.W.10 and P.W.8 at the rear side and L.W.11 in front side of the house. After entering the house of the deceased, the appellant saw P.W.10 in the company of the deceased. The appellant tried to catch P.W.10, but he escaped from the house by throwing the accused from rear side door, by pushing L.Ws.10 and 11 and P.W.8 to a side, and ran away through Northern side Maize fields. L.Ws.10 and 11 and P.W.8 chased P.W.10 shouting ‘thief, thief..’ The neighbours also chased P.W.10 but they could not catch him. As the appellant became angry over the deceased for her illicit intimacy with P.W.10, he poured kerosene with a plastic tin on the deceased and set fire to her with a matchstick. Resultantly, the deceased was gutted in flames and received severe burn injuries on her body. The thatched house of the deceased was also completely burnt. The deceased came out from her house and raised alarm to protect herself by shouting that the appellant poured kerosene on her and set fire, and this was witnessed by the inmates and neighbours (L.Ws.7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19, and P.Ws.7, 8 and 9). Later, the deceased was shifted to Government Hospital, Chintalapudi, through P.W.5 and L.W.21 for treatment and she was admitted therein. While the deceased was undergoing treatment at the Government Hospital, she narrated the incident to P.Ws.1 to 5. On 27.3.2006 at 1.00 a.m., P.W.17, on receipt of hospital intimation, recorded the statement of the victim while she was alive and registered the same as FIR No.35 of 2006 under Section 307 IPC. Earlier, P.W.15 recorded the dying declaration of the deceased before her death at the Government Hospital, Chintalapudi, in the absence of the Mandal Revenue Officer, Chintalapudi, as the regular Judicial Magistrate of First Class post was vacant. On 27.3.2006 at 8.30 a.m., on receipt of the death intimation of the deceased from the Government Hospital, Chintalapudi, a fresh FIR was registered by P.W.17, by altering the Section of Law from 307 IPC to Section 302 IPC. P.W.18 took up the investigation, visited the scene of offence, got drafted Ex.P.12, the scene observation report, by P.Ws.12 and 13, prepared a rough sketch and got photographed the scene of offence and dead body of the deceased through P.W.11. P.W.18 recorded the statements of the witnesses and continued his further investigation. P.W.16 conducted the inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of P.Ws.12 and 13, and L.W.28, and sent the dead body for post-mortem examination, through L.W.34. On 28.3.2006 at 4.00 p.m., the appellant was arrested near Water Tank, on the outskirts of Chintalapudi Village, by P.W.18, in the presence of L.Ws.29 and 30. The appellant was sent to judicial remand after intimating his arrest to his brother - P.W.6. P.W.14, the Civil Assistant Surgeon, Community Health Center, Chintalapudi, issued Ex.P.14, post-mortem report wherein he has




















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