The High Court · 2025

Madduri Srinivas, S/o lylumallu, Age:32 years, Occ: Coolie, R/o Chowllapally Village, Athmakur Mandal, Warangal District. ...Petitioner/A1 AND The State of A P., represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner: Ms. Sahiti, appearing on behalf of Sri E. Venkata Reddy Counsel for the Respondent: Sri E. Ganesh, Assistant Public Prosecutor The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE E.V.VEITUGOPAL CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1824 oF 2013 ORDER: l. Heard Ms.Sahiti, learned counsel appeared on behalf of Sri E.Venkata Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner ,)n record and Sri E.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 2 Petitioner herein was tried as accused No.1 by the learned Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Warangal, in S.C.llo.257 of 2OO8 for the offence punishable under Sections 396 and 4)8-A of IpC and Section 4 of D.P.Act alone. During the course of trierl the prosecution examined P.Ws.l to 12 and got marked Exs.P. 1 to P.11. The learned Principal Assistant Sessions.Judge having assessed tlre entire evidence found the petitioner guilry of the offences punishabte under sections 498-A of IPC and Section 4 of D.P.Act and accordinr;ly convicted and sentenced him to suffer simple imprisonment lor a pr rriod of two years for the offence under Se<:rion 498 A of IPC and alsc to pay a frne of Rs.2OO/- in default of pavmcnt fine ro undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of seven (O7) days and also sentenced him r> undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period o[ one vcar for the offence under Section 4 of D.P.Act and to pay a fine of Rs.8OO/ in default o[ p,ryment of fine to undergo Simple lmprisonmcnr for a pcriod of four (O4) weeks. However, the petitioner was not found guiltv lor the offence under Section 306 of IPC. Aggrieved by the s:rid luclgmcnt dated 09.O7.20()9, the petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No. 135 oi 20O9 on the file o- the Court of the ( I I I i I I I 2 I Additional Sessions Judge at Warangal arrd the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, while concurring with the frndings given by the trial Court dismissed the said appeal by judgment dated 2g.Og.2O 13. Questioning the same, this revision .is preferred by the petitioner- accused No. l. \ 3 The case o[ the prosecution in brief is that the marriage of the deceased was solemnized with petitioner_accused No. l, at the time of marriage, as per demand of accused, cash of Rs.f ,0O,0OO/_ and other house hold article s n'ere given to the accused as dowry. Accused No. 1 and deceased red their marital life amicabry but accused started harassing the dcceased mentally and physicary that she was issue ress and also dcmandecl ro hring additional dowry of Rs.SO,OOO/_ from her parents and nccked out the deceased from their house. The same was witnessed b-v p.Ws.7 and g Deceased came back to her parents house narrated the harassmcnt meted by accused and to that extent panchayath u,as hcld belorc elders i.e., p.Ws.9 and 10 wherein about Rs.3O,OOO/ adclitional donry was given and deceased was sent back to continue hcr nrarit:rl litc but accused did not chaage their attitude artd continued h;rr:rssrnent rupon the deceased physically and menhlly demanding to bring aclditional dowry ot Rs.5O,00O/_ as the deceased remained as a birrrcn u.o[lan, she was abetted to commit suicide. Due to unbearablc harnssm<:nt and abetment meted out by the accused, deceased disgustr-cl r_.rn lrer li[e, on 22.71.2007 deceased went to her 7 l 9 cotton flelds at 14.00 hours consumed pesticide p,rison in order to commit suicide. The same was witnessed by p.W.6:rnd he shifted the deceased to MGM Hospital and deceased died on ,he way to MGM hospital, Warangal at 15.00 hours at Oglapur village. On the complaint of P.W.l, a case in Crime No. 174 of 2OOZ \,r,as regist,_.red. During ttre course of investigation P.W. 16 examined the complairrt and conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased in presencr of p.Ws. 1l to 13 and examined other witnesses visited the scene ol of'ence and drafted crime detail form in the presence of p.Ws. 12 and 3. The medical oflicer conducted autopsy and preserved the visc,.ra for chemical analysis, same was sent to RFSL through SpDO, Wara-rgal, after receipt of report, the medical officer opined that the cleath of ( eceased was due to "Organophosphate arr insecticide poison". Accused Vos. I and 2 were arrested on 3O.11.2O07 and remandcd to judicia custody. On appe€rrance of the accused, on hearing and on consileration charges under sections 498-A, 3O6 of IpC and Secrions 3 and .t of D.p.Act have been framed under section 228 (ll (b) Cr p.C. The tri:r. Court held that accused Nos. I and 2 were not found gr-riltv for the oflence under Section 306 of IPC and Section 3 of D.p.Acr ancl also held that accused No.2 was a.lso not found guilty for the for thc offences under Section 49g_A of IPC and Section 4 of D.P.Act and accordingll. accused llos. I and 2 were acquitted for the Section 306 of IPC and Section 3 r I D.p.Act under Section 235 (1) of Cr.P.C. The learned rrial Courr founcl accused No.1- t \ .T 1 petitioner herein guilty and accordingly convicted accused No.I alone for the offence under Section 49g_A of IpC and Section 4 of D.p.Act. 4 The evidence of p.Ws. to 3 that accused No.l harassed deceased for money is also supported by P.W.f O which is cogent and consistent with regard to the witnessing the death of the deceased and also the marner in which the death of the accused had taken place. Moreover, the evidence of p.W. lO ctearly shows that panchayaths were conducted for six times and the elders cams to a conclusion that accused No.l is at fault' There is no necessiry for p.w. 10 to give fa.lse evidence. The evidence of p.W. lO cannot be discarded only on the ground that he has not given the names of thc persons from the vilrage of accused No.r who attended the panchayath and as he belongs to the village of p.W. 1. The facts of this case are diffcrent from the facts of the decisions cited by leamed counsel for the accuscd. The evidence of p.W. 10 clearly shows that the elders found accuscd N.. I at fault so they are eye witnesses for the demand made by arccuscd N<.r. I and elders also advised to pay Rs.3O,OOO/- to satisfy :rccused No. l. prosecution has amply proved that accused No. I committcd the offcnce under Section 49g_A of IpC and Section 4 of D.p.Act bc,r,oncl all the reasonable doubt. 5 The appellate courr clismissecl the appeal on 2g.Og.2013 and bail was granted by this Courl on 30.Ou.20 t3 and also on perusing the record it is clear thar the accuscd is in Judicial Custody from 3O.71.2OO2 to 14.12.2OO7 r.c.. ncarl]. for a period of l5 days. N 5 6 In the instant case, the incident pertains to the year 2OO7, i.e., 17 years ago. The petitioner/accused has already urrdergone physical incarceration for about 15 days and mental trauma f.rr about 17 years. Therefore, this court is of tJ:e view that lenient vieu, c rn be taken in-so- far as the said sentence of imprisonment imposed or the petitioner by the courts below is concerned. 7 In the result, the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner-accused No.1 by both the courts belou, is morlified and the said sentence is reduced to that of the period, r,r,hir:h the petitioner_ accused No.l had already undergone. Except the sard modification in all other aspects this revision is dismissed. 8 As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, i[ anv, pending in this criminal revision case shall also stand dismisscd. //TRUE COPY// The I Additional Sessions Judge, Warangal. (wit h The Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Warangal Sd/. K. SAILESHI .JOINT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER 'eco ds, if an y) Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the l;tate of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] One CC to Sri E. Venkata Reddy, Advocate [OPUCI Two CD Copies { To, 1 2 3 4 5 6 kan/D I I I ; i i ! t I i i i i I q :i ! I I a HIGH COURT DATED:2310112025 ORDER GRLRC.No.1824 of 2013 i j \ ,,) 't $ lrtE.sf4 c

16. 13 JUl,l zffi D7 \.-i___ r r- rrC-.\1 * ((' t_ ,.) DISMISSING OF THE CRIMINAL REVISION CASE