APHC010127312018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3547] TUESDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 600/2018 Between: 1. KODAMALA JOHN FIKIL KUMAR, R/O. BACKSIDE OF VENKATESWARA THEATRE, ABM COMPOUND, VINUKONDA TOWN, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...APELLANT AND 1. THE STATE OF A P, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad. ...RESPODENT Appeal under Section 372/374(2)/378(4) of Cr.P.C praying that the High Court may be pleased to may be pleased to set aside the Jugdment dated 25-01-2018 passed in SC No. 347 of 2017 by the learned XIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Narasaraopet and acquit the appellant and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 imposed in the Jugdment dated 25- 01-2018 passed in SC No. 347 of 2017 by the learned XIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Narasaraopet and release the Petitioner on bail, pending disposal of the Criminal Appeal and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 Pleased to grant bail to the petitioner/Appellant herein by suspending the operation of conviction and sentence imposed by the learned XIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Narasaraopet vide its Calendar and Judgment Dt. 25-01-2018 in S.C.NO. 347 of 2017 on the file of the XIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Narasaraopet, pending disposal of the main Criminal Appeal and pass Counsel for the Apellant: 1. N ASWARTHA NARAYANA Counsel for the Respodent: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI TUESDAY, THIS THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE SPECIAL DIVISION BENCH PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY and THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 600 of 2018 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice K. Suresh Reddy) Sole accused in S.C.No.347 of 2017 on the file of the Court of XIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Narasaraopet, Guntur District, is the appellant. 2. He was tried and convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for ‘LIFE’ and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo Simple Imprisonment for three months. 3. Gravamen of the charge is that on 31.05.2017 at about 11:00 P.M., the accused beat his wife by name Kodamala @ Boilapalli Dana Jessy Kalavathi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the deceased’) with chutney pounder on her head and other parts of the body, while she was sleeping in the house of the accused, causing her death, thereby committed offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. 4. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that : (i) The accused is none other than husband of the deceased, and both of them, along with their children, are residing at ABM Compound, Vinukonda Town. Originally, the accused was resident of Mrutyunjayapuram, Nuzendla Mandal, and the deceased was resident of Tripuranthakam Mandal, Prakasam District. P.Ws 1 and 2 are brother and sister, respectively, of the deceased, and they are residents of Tripuranthakam Village and Mandal, Prakasam District. (ii) The marriage of the deceased was performed with the accused on 16.12.2006, and the couple blessed with a son and a daughter aged about four and three years, respectively. The accused was working as a Teacher in Mandal Parishad Upper Primary School, Vinukonda. The accused, deceased, and their two children were residing in a rented house belonging to P.W.3, situated at A.B.M. Compound, Vinukonda. Five years prior to the incident, the accused, suspecting the fidelity of the deceased, started harassing her both physically and mentally. Subsequently, the accused necked out the deceased from matrimonial home. Thereafter, the matter was placed before the elders P.Ws.4 and 8, who in turn advised the accused to look after the deceased properly. Thereafter, the deceased again joined matrimonial home. In spite of the advice, the accused did not change his attitude. On 31.05.2017 at about 11:00 P.M., the accused attacked the deceased with a chutney pounder while she was sleeping on the cot. The deceased and children raised a hue and cry. Immediately, owner of the house, P.W.3, who is residing in the other portion, along with another lady by name B. Mariamma, who is residing in the ground floor, rushed to the spot and found the accused, leaving the house with chutney pounder, proclaiming that he killed the deceased. They also found the deceased in a pool of blood. P.W.1, having received information, came to the house of the accused and found the dead body in a pool of blood. P.W.1 inquired with the children, P.W.3 and neighbours and came to know that the accused killed the deceased by beating her with a chutney pounder. Immediately, P.W.1 went to the Police Station and gave a report. (iii) P.W.9, Inspector of Police, Vinukonda Town Police Station, received Ex.P1, report from P.W.1 and registered a case in crime No.124 of 2017 under Section 302 I.P.C. He issued copies of F.I.R. to all the concerned. Ex.P13 is F.I.R. Immediately, he went to the scene of offence and found the dead body. He photographed the dead body through his cell phone. Photographs were marked as Ex.P14. He shifted dead body to the Government Hospital. At about 6:30 A.M. on the same day, he secured the presence of mediators, P.Ws5 and 6 and prepared an observation report Ex.P15. He also seized M.Os.2 and 3, a blood- stained pillow and a blood-stained sponge piece from the bed with a cloth, respectively, at the scene of offence. He prepared a rough sketch Ex.P16, at the scene of offence. Thereafter, he proceeded to the Government Hospital, Vinukonda, along with mediators. P.W.9 held inquest over the dead body, in the presence of P.Ws.5, 6 and another. Inquest report is marked as Ex.P17. During the course of inquest, he recorded statements of P.Ws.1, 2 and others. He sent the dead body for postmortem examination. After the inquest, he secured the presence of P.Ws.3, 4, 8 and others and recorded their statements. (iv) P.W.7, Civil Assistant Surgeon, Government Area Hospital, Narasaraopet, conducted autopsy over the dead body. He opined the cause of death was due to multiple injuries on the head. He issued postmortem certificate, Ex.P11. (v) On 06.06.2017, on credible information, P.W.9 arrested the accused at Mrutyunjayapuram, in the presence of mediators. The accused said to have confessed commission of the offence. He led P.W.9 and mediators to his rented house and produced chutney pounder, M.O.1, from a vacant site. M.O.1 was seized in the presence of mediators, under a panchanama Ex.P19. P.W.9 sent material objects to RFSL under a letter of advice. RFSL report is marked as Ex.P20. Human blood was detected on items 1 to 3. After receiving all the documents and after completion of investigation, P.W.9 filed charge sheet. 5. In support of its case, prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 9, marked Exs.P1 to P20 and exhibited M.Os.1 to 3. 6. When the accused was examined under 313 Cr.P.C., he denied the incriminating evidence appearing against him. 7. Accepting the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3 coupled with the medical evidence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the accused as aforesaid. 8. Heard Sri N. Aswatha Narayana, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Marri Venkata Ramana, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State. 9. Learned counsel for the appellant strenuously contends that the only witness available on record about the incident is P.W.3. He contended that P.W.3 was planted by the prosecution belatedly, at the instance of L.W.4, Kommu Narasaiah, who was working as a constable. He further contended that nobody witnessed the incident, and the prosecution has not placed any material to show that the appellant was present in the house at the relevant point of time. Except the evidence of P.W.3, there is no other evidence to connect the appellant with the alleged offence. As such, he requests this Court to set aside the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned trial Judge. 10. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the appeal contending that the presence of P.W.3 cannot be doubted at all. He contended that P.W.3 is the landlord, who is residing in the portion adjacent to the portion where the accused and the deceased were residing. He further contended that in Ex.P1, report, which was given by P.W.1 at about 2:00 A.M. on 01.06.2017, the name of P.W.3 was mentioned. Apart from the name of P.W.3, the name of L.W.6, Betham Mariyamma, who is residing in the ground floor, was also mentioned. There is no animosity for P.W.3 to speak against the accused. As such, he requests this Court to dismiss the appeal by confirming the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Judge. 11. We have carefully scrutinised the entire evidence on record. Page 9 of 12 12. P.Ws.1 and 2 are brother and sister, respectively, of the deceased. Both of them, in their evidence, have categorically stated that the marriage between the accused and the deceased took place on 16.12.2006, and the couple blessed with one son and a daughter. It is further evidence that the accused used to harass the deceased both physically and mentally, frequently, by suspecting her character. They further stated that the accused, in fact, necked out the deceased from the matrimonial home and thereafter, P.Ws4 and 8 held panchayat between the accused and the deceased in March 2017. Thereafter, the deceased joined matrimonial home. Their further evidence is that despite the mediations held by P.Ws.4 and 8, the accused did not change his attitude. As such, the prosecution proved the motive for the accused to kill the deceased. 13. Coming to the evidence of P.W.3, she is none other than the owner of the house, where the accused and deceased, along with their children, were residing. P.W.3, in her evidence, stated that at about 11:00 P.M. on 31.05.2017, on hearing cries of the deceased and the children, she rushed to the portion of the accused, which is adjacent to her portion and found the children, crying. She also saw the accused, who left the house along with Chutney Pounder, proclaiming that it was he who killed the deceased. P.W.3 found the deceased with injuries on the cot. P.W.3 also stated that subsequently, P.W.1 and relatives of the deceased came to the scene of offence. Thereafter, P.W.1 went to the Police Station and gave a report, Ex.P1, basing on which, P.W.9 set the criminal law into motion. 14. Admittedly, except the accused, deceased and their two children aged about four years and three years respectively, there is no other inmate in the house. The incident took place on 31.05.2017, and the accused remained absconding till 06.06.2017. No explanation is coming forward from the accused as to how the deceased met with homicidal death in his house, where no other person was present. Apart from that, the accused absconded for a period of six days. 15. As seen from the material on record, the name of P.W.3 was mentioned in the earliest report Ex.P1, given by P.W.1. It is stated in Ex.P1, as follows: “… On 31-05-2017 night at about 11-00 P.M. I was informed that my brother-in-law John Pikil Kumar with an intention to kill my sister, beat her on his head cruelly with a chutney pounder while she was lying on the cot and killed her. At that time, on hearing the cries raised by my sister and children, the house owner Sambrjyam, who was residing in side portion, Betham Mariyamma, who was residing in down stair and the neighbours when came there, my brother-in-law escaped from there with chutney pounder.” 16. Further, in the inquest report, Ex.P17, the name of P.W.3 was found, as a person who saw the deceased alive lastly. As such, the presence of P.W.3 at her house at the relevant point of time cannot be disbelieved. Further, there is no animosity for P.W.3 to depose against the accused. 17. The prosecution also proved the recovery of M.O.1 from the vacant site at the rented house of the accused, situated in ABM Compound. As seen from RFSL report, Ex.P20, M.O.1 contains human blood. Further, the version spoken by the material prosecution witnesses has been corroborated by the medical evidence adduced through P.W.7, coupled with postmortem report Ex.P11. Doctor, P.W.7, in his evidence categorically stated that the deceased received several injuries on her vital parts of the body, which are mostly on the head. As such, the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt with the evidence of P.W.3 coupled with the evidence of P.Ws.1, 2 and 7. 18. In view of the facts and circumstances, the conviction and sentences recorded by the learned XIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Narasaraopet, Guntur District, need no interference. Page 12 of 12 19. In the result, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed, confirming the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned XIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Narasaraopet, Guntur District, in S.C.No. 347 of 2017, dated 25.01.2018. As the appellant was released on bail, by order, dated 28.03.2023, in I.A.No.1 of 2023, in terms of the orders passed by the composite High Court in Batchu Rangarao and others v. State of A.P.1, he is directed to surrender before the concerned, to serve the remaining sentence of imprisonment, failing which, the learned trial Judge is directed to secure his presence by issuing warrants and commit him to prison for serving the remaining portion of sentence. It is needless to state that the period already undergone by the accused shall be given set off, as per the provisions of Section 428 Cr.P.C. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY _______________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date : 09.09.2025 IKN 1 2016 (3) ALT (Crl.) 505 (DB) (A.P.)