APHC010916022017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI 'A MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY AND HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1459 of 2017 Appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C, against the Judgment conviction and sentence of life imprisonment imposed in S.C.No.286 of 2015 dated 15.05.2017 on the file of the VI Additional Sessions Judge, Kadapa, Kadapa District. Between: of Yeturi Venkatesu, S/o. Late Gangaiah, R/o. Velugupalli, Harijanawada of Sidhout Mandal, Kadapa District. ...Appellant/Accused AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, through SHO, Vontimitta Circle Police Station, Kadapa District, rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court, Amaravati. ...Respondent/Complainant : Sri Kolusu Ravikiran Kumar (Legal Aid) Counsel for the Respondent : Additional Public Prosecutor The Court made the following Judgment: Counsel for the Petitioner APHC010916022017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3528] MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1459 OF 2017 Between: Yeturi Venkatesu • APPELLANT AND The State of Andhra Pradesh ... RESPODENT Counsel for the Appellant: 1.KOLUSU RAVIKIRAN KUMAR 2. LEGAL AID Counsel for the Respondent: 1.ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: 2 jyDGMENT:_(per Hon'ble Sri Justice K. Suresh Reddy) Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence recorded by judgment dated 15-05-2017 in Sessions Case No. 286 of 2015 on the file of the Court of learned VI Additional Sessions Judge, Kadapa (for short, 'the trial Court), the accused therein filed the present criminal appeal before this Court. 2. The appellant-accused was tried by the trial Court under the following three charges: I charge was under Section 498-A IPC: II charge was under Section 302 IPC: and III charge was under Section 316 IPC 3. Substance of the charges is that the accused used to harass his wife by name Yeturu Pavithra (hereinafter referred to as 'deceased No. 2') both physically and mentally by consuming alcohol and demanding money and on the morning of 22-12-2014, the accused returned home in a drunken state and demanded deceased No. 2, who was seventh month pregnant, money for consuming alcohol and when she refused, the accused poured kerosene on her and set fire to her with a matchstick and fled away bolting doors of the house from outside and thereafter, deceased No. 2 was shifted to RIMS Hospital, Kadapa, in 3 • 108-ambulance and while undergoing treatment, deceased No. 2 succumbed to burn injuries along with the quick un-born child (hereafter referred to as 'deceased No. 1), thereby committed offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 302 and 316 IPC. 4. After completion of trial, the trial Court convicted the appellant- accused and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of two months, for the offence under Section 302 IPC. trial Court acquitted the appellant-accused of the Sections 498-A and 316 IPC. The charges under 5. Case of the prosecution witnesses, briefly is as follows: as emanated from the prosecution The accused is none other than husband of deceased P.Ws.1 and 2 are brothers of deceased No. 2 and P.Ws.3 neighbours of the accused and deceased No. 2. No. 2. to 7 are The marriage of the accused and deceased No. 2 was performed about six years prior to the date of incident and they were blessed with a son. They used to reside in Harijanawada at Velugupalli Village of Sidhout Mandal District. Thereafter, the accused, having addicted to Kadapa consume alcohol used to harass deceased No. 2 both physically and mentally demanding her money for consuming alcohol. While so, on the morning of 4 22-12-2014, the accused returned home in a drunken state and demanded deceased No. 2 money for consuming alcohol, for which the latter refused. Immediately, the accused took out kerosene tin lying in the house, poured kerosene on her and set fire to her with a matchstick. Being unable to bear the burns, the deceased came out of the house by raising hue and cry. Hearing the cries of deceased No. 2, neighbours came there, put off the flames and shifted her to RIMS Hospital, Kadapa, in 108-ambulance. At about 11.45 a.m., P.W.9-Head Constable, RIMS Police Station, Kadapa, received hospital intimation- Ex.PIO. Having received the intimation, P.W.9 went to hospital and recorded a statement-Ex.P9 from the injured. He sent Ex.P9-statement along with Ex.P10-intimation to Sidhout Police Station on the point of jurisdiction. On the same day at about 2 p.m., P.W.12-the then Sub Inspector of Police, Sidhout Police Station, received Exs.P9 and P10 and registered a case in crime No. 141 of 2014 under Section 307 IPC. P.W.12 issued copies of FIR to all the concerned. EX.P16 is FIR. Thereafter, P.W.12 went to RIMS Hospital, Kadapa, secured the presence of P.W.1 and the injured and recorded their statements. Thereafter, he went to the scene of offence situated at Harijanawada, Velugupalli Village. He prepared a rough sketch-Ex.P17 at the scene of He also seized one plastic can-M.O.1 under police proceedings- Ex.P18. He also recorded a statement from P.W.3. On offence. 5 23-12-2014, he arrested the accused in his house at Harijanawada of Velugupalli Village. On 25-12-2014 at 10.30 a.m., he received death intimation of quick unborn male child of deceased No. 2. He therefore added Section 316 IPC. Ex.P19 is altered FIR. While undergoing treatment, deceased No. 2 succumbed to injuries on 30-12-2014. P.W.12 altered the Sections of law from 307 and 316 IPC to 302 and 316 IPC. Ex.P20 is altered FIR. Further investigation was taken over by P.W.13-the then Inspector of Police, Vontimitta Circle. On the requisition from Duty Doctor, RIMS Hospital, Kadapa, P.W.11-the then learned IV Additional District Munsifi, Kadapa, went to RIMS Hospital, Kadapa, on 22-12-2014 at about 1.05 p.m. and recorded a statement from the injured which was marked as Ex.P14. On 25-12-2014, P.W.13 received information at about 10 a.m. He went to Sidhout Police Station at about 10.30 a.m. and collected copy of FIR. He visited RIMS Hospital, Kadapa, and held inquest over the dead body of deceased No. 2 in the presence of P.W.8 and another. Inquest report was marked as Ex.P8. At the inquest, he recorded statements of P.Ws.1 and 2. Thereafter, he sent the dead body of deceased No. 2 for conducting post mortem examination. P.W.10-Assistant Professor, in-charge H.O.D., Department of Forensic Medicine, RIMS Hospital, Kadapa, conducted autopsy over the 6 dead body of deceased No. 2. He opined the cause of death was due to complications of burns. He accordingly issued Ex.P^2-post mortem certificate pertaining to deceased No. 2. He also issued post mortem certificate of deceased No. 1 which was marked as Ex.P11. Thereafter, P.W.13 went to the scene of offence and recorded a statement of P.W.3. On 10-01-2015, he received post mortem certificates-Exs.P11 and P12. After completion of investigation, he filed charge sheet. 6. In support of its case, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 13 and got marked Exs.P1 to P20 apart from exhibiting M.0.1-. 7. When the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., he denied the incriminating material appearing against him and reported oral or documentary evidence on his behalf. no 8. Accepting the two dying declarations marked as Exs.PO and P14, the trial Court convicted the appellant-accused as afore-stated. 9. Heard Sri Ravikiran Kumar Kolusu, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-accused, and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. We have carefully perused the entire evidence on record. All the material witnesses examined by the prosecution i.e. P.Ws.1 to 7 did not 10. 7 support its case and they were declared hostile. P.W.8 is inquest punch, P.W.9 is Head Constable who recorded Ex.P9-dying declaration, P.W.10 is Doctor who conducted autopsy, P.W.11 is the then learned IV Additional District Munsifi, Kadapa, who recorded Ex.P14-dying declaration and P.Ws.12 and 13 are investigating officers. As such, all the material witnesses including the brothers of deceased No. 2 did not support the case of prosecution. 11. The only evidence available on record is two dying declarations, one recorded by P.W.9-Head Constable which was marked as E)t.P9 and the other recorded by P.W.11-the then learned IV Additional District Munsifi, Kadapa, which was marked as Ex.P14. Coming to the earliest dying declaration recorded by P.W.9 which was marked as Ex.P9, deceased No. 2 stated that on the morning of 22-12-2014, the accused returned home in a drunken state and demanded her money for consuming alcohol; that when she refused to give money, the accused took out the kerosene tin lying there, poured kerosene on her and set fire to her with a matchstick and that being unable to bear the burns, she came out of the house, raised hue and cry and on hearing cries, neighbours gathered there, put off the flames and shifted her to RIMS Hospital, Kadapa, in 108-ambulance. This Ex.P9 was recorded at about 11.55 a.m. Coming to the second dying declaration which was marked 8 as EX.P14 recorded by the then Kadapa, deceased No. 2 date of incident, the learned IV Additional District Munsifi, stated that for the last three days prior to the accused was consuming alcohol; that on 22-12-2014 at about 9.30 a.m., the accused woke meals; that she informed him that up and asked her for she did not prepare rice and asked preparing rice; that immediately, the on her and set fire to her; that room which did not have doors; that the accused bolted the doors from Inside; that deceased No. 2 him to wait for some time for accused grew wild and poured kerosene she immediately went into Pooja removed the bolt and ran outside raising hue and neighbours gathered and put off the flames Hospital, Kadapa, in 108-ambulance. cry and that thereafter and shifted her to RIMS 12. We have carefully scrutinized both first dying declaration, the refused to give money to the the dying declarations. In the reason given by deceased No. 2 is that she accused for consuming alcohol but the reason given in the second dying declaration is that the accused asked tor rice at about 9.30 a.m. and she replied that she did not and asked him to wait for prepare rice some time for preparing rice. In both the reason given by deceased No. 2 dying declarations, the from that, there varies. Apart are inconsistencies in both the dying declarations, the second dying declaration, deceased In No. 2 stated that the accused tv 9 bolted the doors from inside but the allegation in the charge sheet is that after setting fire to deceased No. 2, the accused came out of the house and bolted the doors from outside and ran away. Having carefuJIy analyzed, we find number of inconsistencies in both the dying declarations i.e. Exs.P9 and PI4. Except these two dying declarations, there is no other corroborative piece of evidence adduced by the prosecution. As already pointed out, all the material prosecution witnesses i.e. P.Ws.1 to 7 did not support the case of prosecution and they were declared hostile. As such, Exs.P9 and P14 do not inspire confidence of this Court in the absence of any corroborative piece of evidence. 13. Having carefully examined the case in its entirety and for the are of the opinion that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the appellant-accused beyond all reasonable doubt. reasons recorded hereinbefore. we 14. In the result, the criminal appeal is allowed setting aside the conviction and sentence recorded against the appellant-accused by judgment dated 15-05-2017 in Sessions Case No. 286 of 2015 on the file of the Court of learned VI Additional Sessions Judge, Kadapa. the appellant-accused has been released on bail by this Court by order dated 22-10-2024 in I.A.No. 1 of 2024, in terms of the order passed by a As 1 10 Division Bench of the Composite High Court for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh in Batchu Ranga Rao and others Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Public Prosecutor (CrI.A.M.P.No. 1687 of 2016 in CrI.A.No. 607 of 2011 dated 02-11-2016), he is directed to surrender himself before the concerned jail authorities for completing the formalities for his release. Fine amount paid, if any, by the appellant-accused shall be refunded to him. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand disposed of in consequence. Sd/- S.V.S.R.MURTHY JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The VI Additional Sessions Judge, Kadapa, Kadapa District, (with record) 2. The Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Sidhout, Kadapa District. 3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District. 4. The Station House Officer, Vontimitta Circle Police Station, Kadapa District. 5. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi [OUT] 6. One CC to Sri Kolusu Ravikiran Kumar (Legal Aid), Advocate [OPUC] 7. The Section Officer, Criminal Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. 8. Two CD Copies TK sree HIGH COURT DATED:30/06/2025 i JUDGMENT CRLA No.1459of2017 ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL APPEAL