The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Respondent: SRI D.ARUN KUMAR, ADD|Tlr )NAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: JUDGMENT t IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT ITYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL APPEAL No.582 of2024 22.d DAY OF DECEMBER2O2S Between: Mitkari Laxman @ Lakkan And two others. AND The State of Telangana, Rep by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. APPELLANTS RESPONDENT JUDGMENT This Criminat Appeal is hled challenging the judgment dated 3O.O4.2O24 passed in S.C.No. 128 of 2023 by the Court of Special Sessions Judge for Fast Tracking the Cases relating to Atrocities Against the Women cum I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Medak.

2. The brief facts of the case of prosecution are that on the intervening night of 07/O8.O8.2O18 at about 2:0O a.m., hve or 2 more persons, including the accused, committert a dacoity at rhe house of the de facto complainant (PW I ) situated at Venkateshwara Colony, Narsapur. The accu; :d allegedly broke open the house doors, trespassed int,r the house, threatened the inmates with deadly weapons slt, h as knives and an axe, and forcibly robbed substantial quar tities of gold and silver ornaments and cash belonging to I " r'1, his wife (PW2), sister (PW3), and mother. After committir6 the offence, rhe accused tied the victims, bolted the house f om outside, and fled with the booty. PWI Iodged a comlr aint on the morning of O8.O8.2018, leading to registration rf the crime under Section 395 IPC.

3. During investigation, the accused were atl rehended in connection rvith alother crime, confessional stat )ments'.Irere recorded, stolen property was recovered, . rd a Test Identification Parade was conducted. Upon r r mpletion of a investigation, charge-sheet was filed against Acc: ;ed Nos. 1, 3 and 5 who are appellants herein, (A2 ar ( A4 being absconding/ split up), and the case was comr r itted to the Sessions Court. 3

4. On behalf of the prosecution, it was contended that the evidence of PWs 1 to 3 (eye-witnesses/ injured witnesses) clearly established the occurrence of dacoity and the participation of the accused. Their testimony was corroborated by PW4 (neighbour), the scene of offence panchanama' recovery of stolen property, and the Test Identihcation Parade conducted by a Judicial Magistrate. It was argued that minor discrepancies, if any, did not go to the root of the prosecution case and that all essential ingredients of Sections 390, 391 and 395 IPC stood proved beyond reasonable doubt' In defence, it was contended that the prosecution case 5. suffered from inconsistencies, delay and procedural irregularities. It was contended that the accused were allegedly shown to the witnesses. prior to the Test Identihcation Parade, thereby vitiating the identification process. Reliance was placed on judicial precedents to contend that the conviction based on a tainted identification parade was unsustainable. It was further argued that there was no reliable evidence to conclusively connect the accused with the alleged offence.

6. Upon carcful appreciation of the oral and Iocumentary evidence, the trial Court held that the testimonir:r of PWs 1 to 3 were natural, consistent, and trustworthy, i nd inspired con{idence. Their version regarding the manner o commission of the offence, use of deadly weapons, and t} r, nnmber of offenders clearly established the offence of , acoity. The e vide nce of PW4 and PW5 corroborated the oc c -rrrence and condition of the scene of offence. 7 . The Lrial Court examined the objections r: ating to the 'lest ldentification Parade and found that th( parade was conducted by a Judicial Magistrate (PW8) 1: lowing due llrocedure. 'l'he bald allegation of the accused tlr Lt. they werc shown to the witnesses earlier was held to bt, insufficient, especially in the absence of specific details. TLr trial Court held that vague objections do not invalidate the i lentification proceerlings. The recovery of stolen proper r from the I)ossession of the accused, proved through parc r witnesses ztnd investigating ofl-tcers, further stren€ t tened the prosecution case. Hence, it concluded that all t re essential ingredicnts of dacoity under Section 395 IPC ; ood proved beyond reasonable doubt against Accused Nos.1, ! and 5. I I 5

8. ln the result' the trial Court found Accused Nos l' 3 and 5 guilty o[ the offence punishable under Section 395 IPC Cr'P'C' Each of the and convicted them undqr Section !'35(2) accused was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment ten (10) years and to pay a hne of Rs2o'0o0/-' in default to for one year' AEgfteved thereby' suffer Simple lmprisonment this Criminal Appeal is Prcfcrred 9. Heard Smt B'Vani' loarned counsel for appellants and Sri D Arun Kumar' learncd Adclitionat Public Prosecutor for the resPondent - State impugned

10. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the judgment 15 c6nLrory to law' weight of evidence and probabilities er tre c:ase Sbe conten&::::" j:1".'": gravely erred in convicting the appellants-.1_r,".r, i"a"ptttaent and rcliabie witncss' particl entire prosecution case resLs on interested testimony and She further contended that the when the ^.y suspicious circumstallces conviction is based on rrlere prcsumptions ""t ^""t:-r:: without any legally aclmissible and cogent evidence connectrng the appellants to the alleged offence She asserted that the '\ 6 prosecution failcd to establish any clear mot,' e or definite incriminating material and that the alleged rec I 'ery of stolen property, even il accepted, is a weak piece of c rcumstantial evidence, as the nexus between the offence an: the recovery has not bcen satisfactorily proved. He averred .hat the Test Identification Parade is vitiated by serious disir :pancies and proceclural infirmities, rendering it unsafe to r :ly upon the same lor confirming the identity of the appellant s

11. Learncd counsel for appellant incessart lhat lhe lrial ('ourt lailed tt-r propcrly apprcciatr y contended the evidence on record ancl has not applied a judicious Lr-rd cautious approach u,hile assessing the prosecution witt't,r ses. thereby, cqnvicting the appellants without proof beyond i ll reasonable doubt Shc l;rmcnted that the corroboralive , r idence relied upon by tht' lria[ Court is insufficient and unrc] i ble, and that the scntencc imposed is harsh and ciispropor t onate to the allege d role attributed to the appellants. Theref( 1 :, she prayed this Court to allow the Criminal Appeal by se 1 ng aside the impugned j uclgmcnt of conviction and sentence ; assed by the trial Court. 7 that there was no illegalitY, ' Iearhed Additional Public Prosecutor 12. Per contra, the vehemently opposecl the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants and submitted that the trial Court' upon a careful ancl comprehensive appreciation of both oral had rightlY recorded the and documentary evidence' conviction and sentence' and infirmify or perversity in the jtrdgment warranting interference by this Court He contenderl that the evidence o[ PWs 1 to 3 who were victims of rhe offence, \^'as cogent' consistent and trustworthy, and stood anlply corroborated by independent witnesses, recovery of stolen property and the Test Identilication Parade conducted by a Judicial Magistrate in accordance with law' Therefore, he prayed that the Criminal Appeal be dismissed' confirming the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court- '

13. Having regard to the rival submissions' and on going through the material placed on record' it is noted that the prosecution case rests primarily on the testimonies of PWs 1 to 3, who are the de facto complainant and his family members. PW1, while speaking about the occurrence' gave a general version of the alleged dacoity but faited to attribute "IH 8 anY sPecific overt acts to Accused Nr;.1, 3 and S. His testimony does not disclose distinctive ph r sical features of the asszrilants, nor does it explain hou, h<. ,.as able to clearly iden tiflr the appellants during thc rncidc I which arlmittedlv occurred in the dead of night. PW2 and pJ 3, though claimed lo be cye-witnesses, gave versi ons which a - that of pW1 regarding the manner of entn, i I to the house, the \ryeapons a Ilcgeclly used . , and the exerct s ) luence of cvents. r nesc rnconsistencies are materiai anrl creat r doubt about the reliabr litv of their evidencc. rnconsrstent with

14. Further, the evidence of pWs I to 3 rs with regard to the nature, quandty and desc_ anci silver ornaments allegedly robbed. pWl orname nts, r.vhereas pW2 and pW3 eith< r descriptions or wcre unable to identify the r:: with certain&. None o[ the witnesse s coulrr distinctive ide ntification marks on the seizeci rlso inconsistent otion of the gold ;poke of certain gave diflering overed articles polnt out any rrnaments. No as Purchasc re(:r ipts or prior to establish ou r ership of the These discrepa I :ies assume documentary. proof, such pho tographs, \4'as prociuced alleged stolen propcrty t Er- 9 signifircance,astheallegcdrecoveryofStolenpropertyformsa major link in the chain of circumstantial evidence'

15. The evidence relating to recovely further suffers from serious inf-rrmities' PWtr and PW7' who were examined as mediatorstotheallegedrecovery'didnotfullysupportthe prosecution case PW6 aclnritted in cross-examination that he q,as called to the pohce stettion and that the alleged gold and silver articles were already in lhe custody of the police when the panchanama was prepared' It is noted that he was not able to state from rvhosc possession the articles were recovered or whether l-he recovery was made pursuant to any voluntary confession' Similarly' PW7 failed to state regarding the exact place, manner and timing of the atleged recovery and did not categoricaliy depose that the scized property was recovercd from Accused Nos i ' 3 and 5 More importantly' the seized gold ornaments u'cre not shown to PWs 6 and 7' and said articles were not prr'rduced before tl-re Court' for which' the trial Court observed that the said articles were already given to the complainant for interim custody' and same were sold away by the PW l Horvever' there is no such document marked before the tria! Court to show that alleged articles 10 with dcscription were given to PW 1 as interim t r stody' Their evident:e, thus, does noL inspire confidence i nd casts a serious doubt on the qcnttineness of the rccoven lroceedings'

16. Significantly, neither PW6 nor PW7 ( recovered articlcs as belonging to PWl or other did they depose about any ciistinguishing lea seized ornaments- Thc proscctrtion also farled tc unbrokcn chain o[ custodv of the seized prolt' time of allegecl recoveq/ till its production bt:f I The inconsistcncies itr ttrt: evirlence of the mec i investigating officcrs regrrding sealing' production o[ thc seizccl articles niztteria ] entihed the victims, nor ;ures of the establish an rty frorn the 'e the Court. rtors and the itorage and . affect the credibilitl' of thc rc( r)v('n '

77. With regard to thc Test Identification imperative to not-e that though PW8, the Magir about conducting the paradc, the surrounding create doubt about its evidentiary value There i clelay in conducting thc parade and thc proscc place convincing mate rial to clispel the defence < the irccuscd rrr erc shou n lo llte r'r'ittrr sscs prio' Parade, it is rate, deposed :ircumstances ; considerable rtion failed to fntention that to the parade. In cases resting substantially on identification, the prosecution is requirbd to prove the fairness of the identihcation process beyond doubt. In the present case, the identification evidence lacks such assurance and cannot be treated as sa le corroboralion.

18. Thus, a cumulative reading of the evidence of pWs 1 to 7 reveals material contradictions, unreliable recovery evidence and doubtful identificaLion. It is nell_settled that suspicion, however strong, cannot take the place of proof and that the prosecution must establisih its case beyond reasonable doubt.

19. In view thereof, this Criminal Appeal is allowed setting aside the judgment 30.O4 .2024 passed in S.C.No. 128 ot 2023 by the Court of Special Sessions Juclge for Fast Tracking the Cases relating to Atrocities Against the Women cum I Additional District and Sessior-rs .)udge, Medak. The jail authorities are directe:d to rcleasc. the accused forthwith. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed. SD/-K SHYLESHI JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// CTION OFFICER To, '1 . The Special Sessions J udge for Fast Tracking the Cases Relating to Atrocities Against Women-Cum-l Additional District and Sessions Judge, Medak

2. The Superintendent' Central Jail Cherlapally' Rangaredd I District' 3. The Station House Officer, Narsapur Police Station' tvledak )istrict 4.TwoccstothePublicProsecutor,Highcourtforthestate'fTelanganaat Hyderabad [OUT] I

5. One CC to Ms. BODDIKOORI VANI' Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CD CoPies NVB/ABK Vk F HIGH COURT I \ DATED:2211212025 JUDGMENT CRLA.No.582 of 2024 f o.J i,'I lj14 ( o\.. 0 [i I I'l 707$ * j. ri:() ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL APPEAL 6\ ,€4 tr6-