The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Appellant : Mr. M. Phanidra Bhargava, Legal Aid Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. Arun Kumar Dodla Additional Public Prosecutor The Court delivered the following: F THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER AND THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR J{,IKANTI CRIMINAL APPEAL No.L26+OF 2o1? JUDGMENTi /per Hon'ble Sri Justice K.surender) This Criminal Appeal is filed aggrieved by the judgment dated 16.05.2077, in S.C.No.295 of 2016, on the Iile of II Additional Sessions Judge, Karimnagar at Jagital, convicting the appellant/accused for the offence under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 186O (for short, ,tpC) and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. IOO/-, and in default of pa5rment of fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for 15 days for the offence under Section 302 of IPC.

2. Heard Mr. M. Phanidra Bhargava, Legat Aid Counsel for the appellant/accused, and Mr. Arun Kumar Dodla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent_ State.

3. The case of the prosecution is that pW. 1 is tine de facto complainant and wife of the deceased - Chinna Gangaram. On 25.08.2013, a Telugu wr-itten complaint was KS. J &JAK, J Crt.A.No.1 264-2017 2 lodged by PW. 1, wherein she narrated that the appellant/accused is a known person and that there were disputes within the family regarding the land situated at Regunta canal. The appellant was demanding 1/3'd share in the disputed property. On the date of incident, the appellant went nea-r the house of the deceased. There was a quarrel regarding division of land. The appellant chased the deceased and attacked him with a knife. The deceased fell down in front of house of PW.5 and the deceased. was shifted to the hospital.

4. On t}le basis of the written complaint filed on 25.08.2013, at 11:00 A.M., a case was registered under Section 307 of IPC. However, while undergoing treatment, the deceased died in hospital on O9. t2.2O13, after more than three (3) months.

5. The Doctor - PW. 10, who conducted postmortem of the deceased, found the following injuries.

1. Injury admeasuring 2 X 3 inches just below the left ear; and 2 Injury ad.measuring 4 X 5 inches over anterior aspects of right side of chest below right cannily 3 KS.J&JAK,J Crl.A.No.l264 2017 parsing pectoralic muscle (chest underneath the skin), which is a stab injury, grievous in nature.

6. The cause of death of deceased, according to pW. 1O - Doctor, was "due to cardio respiratory arrest due to secondary infections due to open cord palsy due to the stab injury".

7. After death of the deceased, the Section of law was altered to Section 3O2 of IPC.

8. learned Sessions Judge mainly placed reliance on the eye witness account of PW. 1 and convicted the appellant/ accused.

9. Mr. M. Phanindra Bhargav, learned Iegal Aid Counsel appearing for the appellant/accused, would submit that there are several contradictions in the evidence of witnesses. PW. 1 is not educated. However, a written complaint was filed. PW.5, in front of whose house the deceased fell down after the attack, also contradicted his own version regarding the incident. In fact, all the witnesses were examined with a delay of two months. 4 KS,J&JAKJ Crl.A.No.l264 2017 In the said circumstances, no case is made out against the appellant.

10. The incident happened in the morning on

25.08.2013. PW.1 is the wife of deceased, who was present in the house. The appellant/accused went to the house of deceased and attacked him and while the deceased was running, he fell down in front of house of PW.5. The deceased sustained an injury on the head and another stab in;ury in his chest.

11. The death of the deceased was on account of cardio respiratory arrest due to secondary infections resulting from open cord palsy caused by the stab injury. Even according to PW. 10 - Doctor, the cause of death of the deceased was not due to injuries received on the date of incident, but due to the complications that arose during the treatment. For the said reason, the conviction under Section 302 of IPC cannot be sustained.

12. The grievous injury was the stab injury on the vital part, i.e., chest below right cannily parsing pectoralic muscle. There were disputes regarding division of the 5 KS,J&JAK.J CrlA.No.l264 2017 property situated at canal at the outskirts of the village. PWs.2 and 3 are eye witnesses to the said incident and in their evidence. the name of PW. 1 was mentioned. and also the fact of deceased falling down in front of the house of PW.s. Nothing was elicited during the course of their cross examination, so as to discredit their evidence. The death rvas not a direct result of the injuries, but due to the subsequent complications.

13. In view of the same, the conviction under Section 302 of IPC imposed on the appellant/accused is hereby set aside, and the appellant is convicted under Section 307 of IPC and sentenced to undergo seven years imprisonment.

14. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is partly allowed. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending in this Crimina-l Appeal, shall stand closed. sd/- c v ""'i5fixY'J[tllsExA //TRUE COPY// /l \ ', \l\ J " sEcTloN oFFICER l To, .1 . The ll Additional sessions Judge At Karimnagar At Jagtial.(with records) 2. The Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Metpalli' 3. The Station House Officer, Metpalli Police Station, Jagtial' 4. The Superintendent, Central Prison' Karimnagar. 5. Two Cds to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. (OUT)

6. One CC to Mr. M Phanidra Bhargava, Legal Aid [OPUC] 7. Two CD Copies w DUplp HIGH COURT DATED:'1110212025 JUDGMENT CRLA.No.1264 ot 2017 y{E STAr€ 1 J c (j) .,b ,,., 25 APB mfi oEsparc*?O o \> -1, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL APPEAL c.Q@'b \o $q,o