Spl.SC 9-2019 1 of 21
IN THE COURT OF THE SPL. SESSIONS JUDGE FOR TRIAL OF CASES
UNDER SCs/STs (PoA) ACT-CUM-VIII ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE AT
NIZAMABAD
Present:- Sri B.Gautam Prasad, I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Nizamabad. FAC: Spl. Sessions Judge for trial of cases under SCs/STs (PoA) Act, Nizamabad.
Dated this the 29th day of April, 2022.
SPECIAL SESSIONS CASE No.9 of 2019
(Cr.No.154/2018 of PS Morthad) 1Name of the Assistant Commissioner of Police, complainantArmoor, P.S. Morthad. 2Name of the accused 1Olladapu Gangaram @ Obama s/o Yellanna, age: 37 yrs, Caste; Munnur Kapu, Occ: Agrl 2Baddam Raja Shekar @ Shekar, S/o Prathap, Age: 27 years, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agril 3Gopodi Gangadhar @ Gangareddy S/o Gangaram. age: 41 yrs, yrs, Caste:Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agrl. 4Rokkam Murali S/o Bagavanth, age: 43 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agrl. 5Kommula Ramesh S/o Rajanna, age: 38 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agri 6Nerella Ramesh @ Pippera Ramesh s/o Kishan, age: 34 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ:Agri. 7Kunta Devadhar (died, abated) 8Kunta Naveen s/o Hanmandlu, age: 27 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agri 9Nomula Mahipal S/o Rajeshwar, age: 35 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agrl 10Nerolla Sai Ram s/o Sayanna, age: 43 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agrl 11Baddam Jaipal s/o Gangadhar, age: 34 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agri 12Kunta Chandhar s/o Borranna, age: 38 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agri 13Baddam Manohar s/o Rajanna, age: 34 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agrl 14Baddam Anjaiah s/o Malkanna, age: 45 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agri 15Baddam Shankar s/o Venkanna, age: 58 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agrl 16Baddam Linga Reddy S/o Naganna, age: 37 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agrl. 17Gopidi Chinna Reddy S/o Narsaiah, age: 47 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agrl.
Spl.SC 9-2019 2 of 21 18Kunta Nagesh S/o Gangaram, age: 41 years, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agrl., 19Baddam Ashok @ Kallem Ashok S/o Malkanna, age: 43 years, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ:Agril. 20Rayudi Mahesh s/o Isthari, age: 36 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agrl 21Nerella Delip S/o Devadas, age: 27 yrs. Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agrl. 22Kommula Naresh s/o Narayana. age: 29 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu, 0cc: Agrl. 23Busa Akil S/o Gangadhar. age: 24 yrs. Caste: Guradi Kapu, 0cc: Agril., 24Busa Suresh s/o Gangadhar, age: 26 yrs. Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agrl., 25Baddam Ram Reddy s/o Rajaram, age: 44 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu. Occ: Agrl 26Baddam Kashi Ram, s/o Bojanna, age: 38 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu. Occ: Agrl 27Baddam Satya Rajeshwar s/o Rajanna, age:33 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu. Occ. Agrl 28Busa Maruthi s/o age: 30 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agrl 29Gaddam Sai Ram s/o Kashiram, age: 34 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu. Occ: Agrl., 30Gaddam Mohan s/o Kashiram, age: 32 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agrl., 31Eleti Peddi Reddy s/o Bakkanna, age: 49 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agrl 32Nuthula Chinna Reddy s/o Rajanna, age: 51 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu. Occ: Agri. 33Musku Rajendhar S/o Rajeshwar, age: 38 yrs, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agrl., 34Nuthula Narsa Reddy S/o Pedda Reddy, age: 32 years, Caste: Guradi Kapu, Occ: Agrl., 35Kummari Avinash s/o Ganga sayanna, age: 23 yrs, Caste: Kummari, Occ: Agrl
All are R/o Thimmapur village of Morthad Mandal, Dist. Nizamabad 3 Offences chargedUnder sections 342, 363, 324, 448, 427, 290, 506 r/w 149 IPC, and u/s 3(2)(va) of SCs & STs (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act-2015.
4 Plea of the accused Not guilty 5 Finding of the Judge Found A1 to A6, A8 to A13, A15 & A16 guilty U/sec.323 and 506 r/w 109 IPC.
6 Prosecution conducted by Addl. Public Prosecutor, Nizamabad 7 Accused defended bySri V. Bhaskar, Advocate for the accused persons.
Spl.SC 9-2019 3 of 21 8 Sentence or order In the result, I find all the accused not guilty for the offences U/sec. 342, 363, 448, 427 and 290 r/w 149 IPC, and U/sec.3(2)(va) of SCs & STs (PreventionofAtrocities) Amendment Act-2015 and I acquit them for the said offences under Section 235(1) Cr.P.C. Further, I find A1 to A6, A8 to A13, A15 and A16 guilty for the offences punishable U/sec.323 and 506 r/w 149 IPC and convict them U/sec.235(2) Cr.P.C. Since A6 is main accused in this case as per the evidence of Pws.1 and 2 and he led unlawful assembly for commission of said offences, I sentence A6 to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence U/sec.323 IPC, (in default to pay said fine, he (A6) shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month) and I sentence A6 to pay fine of Rs.50,000/- for the offence U/sec.506 IPC, (in default to pay said fine, he (A6) shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months).
Further, I sentence A1 to A5, A8 to A13, A15 and A16 to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- each for the offence U/sec.323 r/w 149 IPC, (in default to pay said fine, they shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month each) and I sentence A1 to A5, A8 to A13, A15 and A16 to pay fine of Rs.4,000/- each for the offence U/sec.506 r/w 149 IPC, (in default to pay said fine, they shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months each). Both sentences shall run consecutively.
The sureties and bail bonds of A14, A17 to A35 shall stand cancelled after expiry of six months from this day. Mos.1 to 3 shall be destroyed after appeal time.
Out of the said fine amount of Rs.1,16,000/- if paid, an amount of Rs.40,000/- shall be paid to Pw.1, Rs.10,000/- each shall be paid to Pws.2 to 5 and Rs.20,000/- shall be paid to Pw.6 as victim compensation, after appeal time is over.
Spl.SC 9-2019 4 of 21
This case coming on 26.04.2022 for final hearing before me in the presence of Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State; and of Sri V. Bhaskar, Advocate for the accused persons; and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
1.The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Armoor filed charge-sheet against the accused persons herein (out of 35 accused persons, case against A7 was abated as died during pendency of this case) in Cr.No.154/2018 of Morthad Police Station (in which jurisdiction, scene of offences are located) alleging as under.
(a) On 12.11.2018 at 11.00 p.m., the defacto complainant Sri Indur
Swamy (Pw.1/Lw.1) lodged Ex.P1/complaint with Sub Inspector of
Police, Morthad (Pw.10/Lw.14) alleging as under:
(b) The defacto complainant is resident of scene of offence village
Thimmapur and belongs to Madiga (Scheduled Caste) and his occupation is driver. 5 years back, one Ravinder (not cited as witness) and Prashanthi (daughter of A12) of the same village fell in love with each other and said Ravinder is a Kummari caste (BC) boy and said Prashanthi is a Guradi kapu caste (OC) girl. 10 days earlier to the incident in this case, parents of said Prashanthi (A12 and his wife) on coming to know about said love affair, they shifted
Prashanthi to Mendora village, Balkonda Mandal and kept in their relatives’ house. Since said Ravinder is a friend of defacto complainant, Ravinder requested the defacto complainant on 9.11.2018 by 7.00 p.m. to shift him and said Prashanthi in his Car to
Hyderabad to enable them to get their marriage performed. Then, the defacto complainant requested Babu Pranay (Pw.2/Lw.2) to
Spl.SC 9-2019 5 of 21 accompany him to Mendora village and they both went to Mendora village and picked up said Ravinder and Prashanthi (lovers) in the
Car of defacto complainant to go to Hyderabad and said Pranay (Pw.2/Lw2) got down at Perkit while proceeding to Hyderabad. The defacto complainant took said lovers to Hyderabad and on the next day i.e. on 10.11.2018 said lovers got married. Then, the defacto complainant brought them back on the same day and dropped them in Nizamabad and reached to his village Thimmapur.
(c)On 12.11.2018 at 11.00 a.m., A6 telephoned to defacto complainant and asked him to come to Rythu Sangam (1st scene of offence) stating that he wants to engage Car of defacto complainant for rent. When the defacto complainant went there, he was taken to inside of the Rythu Sangam by beating with hands and enquired about whereabouts of said lovers stating that they noticed him along with said lovers by verifying CC cameras at Toll Plaza and in that connection, they threatened defacto complainant with dire consequences if he failed to disclose whereabouts of lovers. Then, the defacto complainant revealed that said lovers got down from his
Car at Nizamabad and their whereabouts are not known to him. He also revealed that said Pranay (Pw.2/Lw.2) accompanied him to
Mendora village. Then, A1 to A13, A16 and Baddam Naveen,
Baddam Balreddy and Baddam Shekar (not charge sheeted) and others took defacto complainant and said Pranay to Nizamabad and searched for said lovers in lodges and during return journey to
Thimmapur village, they were confined them near Guest house of one Sunil Reddy at Morthad and threatened them with dire consequences that they will kill him and Pranay and from there, said accused persons shifted them to Durga temple area in Cars by 7.00
Spl.SC 9-2019 6 of 21 p.m. and beat them with sticks and hands indiscriminately and from there, accused persons and others shifted them to Gandhi statue,
Thimmapur where other persons belong to Guradi Kapu caste(OC) joined and beat the defacto complainant and said Pranay black and blue. When parents and friends of defacto complainant and said
Pranay interfered, they also beat parents of defacto complainant (Induru Gangaram/Lw.4) (reported died during pendency of this case)ChityalaLaxmi/Pw.4,ChityalaArun/Pw.3,Boga
Narsaiah/Pw.5). All the villagers noticed the said incident. They beat defacto complainant and said Pranay (Pw.2) suspecting that they helped said lovers in shifting to Hyderabad and enable them to get married at Hyderabad.
(d)Basing on the said Ex.P1/complaint given by Pw.1, the Sub
Inspector of Police (Pw.14) set the law into motion by registering as a case in Cr.No.154/2018 for the offences U/sec.341, 363, 323, 290, 506 r/w 149 IPC and U/sec.3 (2) (va) of SCs & STs (Prevention of
Atrocities) Amendment Act-2015 and then the said ACP (Pw.11/Lw.15) took up investigation after receipt of Proceedings from Commissioner of Police, Nizamabad to investigate this case as per rule 7(1) of SCs & STs (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1995.
During investigation, he visited the scene of offence village i.e.
Thimmapur and there secured presence of Pws.1 to 6 and said
Gangadhar (father of Pw.1 died during pendency of this case) and examined them and recorded their statements. He secured presence of Pw.7 and B. Rajeshwar (Lw.9) and conducted scene of offence panchanama (1) at said Rythu Sangam. He also drawn rough sketch of it. He also visited Durga temple area where part of the incident took place and he conducted scene of offence
Spl.SC 9-2019 7 of 21 panchanama (2) in the presence of same mediators. He also visited the scene of offence at Gandhi Statue of Thimmapur village and conducted scene of offence panchanama (3) in the presence of same mediators. Likewise, he also conducted scene of offence panchanama (4) at the house of Ch. Gangadhar where accused persons beat Ch. Annapurna (Pw.6) who is mother of Pw.3 another injured. Likewise, he also conducted scene of offence panchanama (5) at the house of Chityala Narayana i.e. husband of Chityala Laxmi (Pw.4/injured) and conducted scene of offence panchanama (6).
The medical officers of Morthad i.e. Pw.9 and Dr. Jyothi(Lw.13) gave treatment to Pws.1 to 7 and issued wound certificate (Ex.P8 to P13).
(e)On 14.11.2018 on reliable information both the said police officials apprehended A1 to A16 at 10.00 a.m. and interrogated in the presence of mediators Pw.8 and Limbadri/Lw.9) and in pursuance of information given by A1 to A6, they seized 5 Cars used for the commission of offence in this case under cover of panchanama and then arrest of them was effected and produced them before the court for judicial remand. On 17.11.2018, the investigating officer/Pw.11 served notices U/sec.41-A Cr.P.C. on accused No.17 to 35 with a direction to appear before the court after receiving summons. After completion of investigation charge sheet is filed.
2.This Court has taken cognizance of the case against the accused No.1 to 35 for the offences under sections 342, 363, 324, 448, 427, 290, 506 r/w 149 IPC, and u/s 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment
Act-2015, and furnished the documents to the accused No.1 to 35 as contemplated under section 207 Cr.P.C.
Spl.SC 9-2019 8 of 21
3.On hearing both sides, charges for the offences under sections 342, 363, 324, 448, 427, 290, 506 r/w 149 IPC, and u/s 3(2) (va) are framed against the accused No.1 to 35, read over and explained to them. The accused No.1 to 35 denied the charges and pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
4.During trial to prove the prosecution case, the prosecution has examined PW.1 to PW.11 and marked Ex.P1 to
Ex.P16 documents and also marked Mos.1 to 3.
5.After closure of adducing prosecution side evidence, the accused No.1 to 6 and 8 to 35 are examined in terms of Section 313
(i) (b) Cr.P.C. by explaining the incriminating circumstances appeared in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. But, they denied the same and they reported no evidence on their side.
However, Ex.D1 contradiction is marked during cross examination of witness Pw.6 by the defence counsel.
6.Heard arguments.
7.Now, the point that arises for determination is:
“Whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused No.1 to 6 and 8 to 35 for the said charges beyond all reasonable doubts?”
POINT:
8.According to the prosecution, on 12.11.2018 at 11.00 a.m., A6 called Pw.1 to the 1st scene of offence/Rythu Sangam and
A6 took him to inside of Rythu Sangam where A1 to A13, A16 and others are available and then A6 enquired about whereabouts of one Ravinder and Prashanthi (lovers) stating that they noticed Pw.1 along with said lovers in CC TV footage at Toll Gate Plaza and then
Spl.SC 9-2019 9 of 21
Pw.1/defacto complainant/injured informed them that on 9.11.2018 in the night time at the request of said lovers, he took them to
Hyderabad and there they got married and on the next day i.e. on 10.11.2018, he brought them back in his Car and they got down from his Car at Nizamabad. The allegation is that basing on information given by Pw.1 as Pw.2 also accompanied Pw.1 to
Mendora village where parents of said Prashanthi kept her with her relatives there and after said lovers getting into Car, Pw.2 got down from said Car at Perkit and for that reason, Pw.2 was also called to the said scene of offence/Rythu Sangam and there A1 to A13, A16 and others took Pw.1 and Pw.2 to Nizamabad in a Car and searched in lodges for tracing out said lovers, but invain and then they brought Pws.1 and 2 to 2nd scene of offence i.e. the place where guest house of Sunil Reddy is located in Morthad village and there they beat Pws.1 and 2 and threatened them with dire consequences like they would kill them if said lovers are not found. The allegation is that from there, they took Pws.1 and 2 to third scene of offence i.e. Durga temple by 7-00 p.m. and there also they beat them with sticks and hands indiscriminately and then shifted them to Gandh
Statue area i.e. 4th scene of offence where some other persons of
Guradi Kapu caste people joined and beat Pws.1 and 2 indiscriminately and also beat parents of Pws.1 and 2 when they interfered to rescue Pws.1 and 2 and caused injuries to them.
9. As already stated above, the prosecution in all examined 11 witnesses besides marking 16 documents and Mos.1 to 3.
(a)Out of the said witnesses, Pw.1 is the main witness in this case being defacto complainant/injured and he belongs to Madiga caste which is one of the scheduled castes. In his evidence, he deposed
Spl.SC 9-2019 10 of 21 to the effect is that “ On 9-11-2018 One Ravinder telephoned to me and informed that he fell in love with one Prashanthi and he decided to get married, he asked me to come to him to engage my car. Then I along with one Pranay went to Mendora village. Then I,
Pranay, Ravinder and Prashanthi went and I dropped Pranay at
Perkit. Then we went to Hyderabad. Then Ravinder and Prashanthi got married in Arya samaj near Charminar, Hyderabad on 10-11- 2018. On the same day I along with Ravinder and Prashanthi came to Nizamabad and I dropped Ravinder and Prashanthi then I went away to my house. One Pippera Ramesh/A6 called me on 12-11- 2018 to engage my car then I went to near Rythu sangam then he called me into the Rythu sangam. Then he told me that he saw me and Ravinder, Prashanthi in CC footage and abused me in the name of caste as “Madiga Lanja koduka, Vallanu eda vettinavura. He along with others beat me with hands and sticks. Then Pranay came there and he was also beaten. Then all the accused brought us to Nizamabad and searched in all the lodges. Then they took us to Thimmapur and other places and beat us with sticks. Then I filed complaint report in police station it is Ex.P1. I sustain injuries on my right shoulder and back side. I was examined by the police”.
(b)Pw.2 is another injured in this case. According to prosecution,
Pw.2 accompanied Pw.1 to Mendora village for picking up said lovers and for that reason, he was also called to the scene of offences and confined him along with Pw.1 till night and beat him.
He deposed to the effect is that “ On 9-11-2018 at 07.00 pm Pw1 called me on that I along with Pw1 went to Mendora and pickup
Ravinder and Prashanthi. Then I drop at Perkit village. On 12-11- 2018 A6 called me to Rythu sangam as such I went there and by the
Spl.SC 9-2019 11 of 21 time Pw1 was already inside the Rythu sangam. Then A6 beat me and abused me as “Lanja Koduka”. At that time A1 to A11, A13,
Baddam Naveen and Baddam Balreddy were present in the Rythu sangam. Then the accused brought us to Nizamabad and searched in lodge but Ravinder and Prashanthi were not found. Then they took us to Sunil reddy guest house and there also beat me and from there they took us to Gandhi statue and there parents of Pw1 and my father came there and accused also beat parents of Pw1 and my father. Mother of Arun/Lw3 also came there and accused also beat her and Arun/Lw3. I sustained injury in left leg and back side. I was examined by the police”.
(c)The prosecution examined Pw.3 stating that all the accused persons went to his house and was taken to Gandhi Statue/last scene of offence and there all the accused beat him black and blue since he helped said Ravinder in love affair with said Prashanthi.
Pw.4 is no other than mother of this Pw.3 and according to prosecution, accused beat her with sticks on her back when she intervened to rescue her son/Pw.3. Pw.3 deposed to the effect is that “Ravinder is my friend and he married One Prashanthi. About 3 years back I was taken by all the accused from my house and beat me near Gandhi statue by abusing on the ground that I Co-operated for the marriage of Ravinder and Prashanathi. The accused also beat Lw5/Chytiala Laxmi who is my mother when she tried to rescue me. I sustained injuries on my thighs and back side. At the time of incident Pw1 and 2 were also present and father of Pw1.
Father of Pw1 also beaten by accused. I was examined by the police”. Pw.4 who is no other than sonof Pw.3 deposed to the effect is that “One Ravinder is class mate of my son Pw3. About 3 years
Spl.SC 9-2019 12 of 21 back all the accused came to my house and took away my son Pw3 to Gandhi statue and beat him. When I intervened to rescue my son accused also beat me with regard to issue of marriage of Ravinder and Prashanthi. Accused beat me with sticks on my back side. I was examined by the police on the next day of the incident.”
(d)The prosecution examined Pw.5 who is no other than father of
Pw.2 Pranay, who accompanied Pw.1 to Mendora for picking up said lovers. According to the prosecution, he is also one of the injured in the hands of accused and eyewitness to the last incident that took place at Durga temple and Gandhi Statue. He deposed to the effect is that “ About 3 years back one lovers married and my son is friend of bride groom. Friends of my son informed me that accused came and took away my son Pw2 from my house to Nizamabad in the car. Then I called my son on the phone. They came to Durga
Mandir. I saw many persons gathered near Gandhi statue where my son and other persons were brought there and beat my son with sticks. When I tried to interfere I was also beaten by the accused with hands. They beat my son and me for helping the lovers by my son. I was examined by the police”.
(e)According to prosecution, Pw.6 is another injured/victim in this case. She deposed to the effect is that “About 3 years back my husband came to my house at 09.00 pm and he had dinner, in the meantime all the accused came to my house and they entered into my house forcefully by breaking the doors. They also damaged our cooler and fridge and enquired about my son. I told them that my son went for fishing. Accused also threatened to kill us by abusing in filthy language to inform whereabouts of my son. Then all the
Spl.SC 9-2019 13 of 21 accused sent out from my house and they locked our house. I was examined by the police on the next day morning”.
(f)Pw.7 is the common mediator for all the scene of offence panchanamas under Ex.P2 to P6. Pw.8 is also panch for seizure of 5
Cars said to be used by the accused persons in the commission of alleged offences in this case. Panchanama is marked as Ex.P7.
(g)Pw.9 is the medical officer who examined Pw.1 to Pw.4 and
Pw.6 and issued Exs.P8 to P12 wound certificates.
(h)Pw.10 is the Sub-Inspector of Police who registered FIR Ex.P14 basing on Ex.P1/complaint and handed over to Pw.11 for investigation.
10.The defence version is that no incident took place as alleged by the prosecution and the accused persons are implicated in this case because of disputes between Rythu Sangam and Sahakara
Sangam members. According to the learned defence counsel, accused are members of Rythu sangam consisting of 25% of village population and remaining 75% of villagers are Sahakara Sangam members and due to disputes between both the Sangam members, these accused are implicated in this false case. During course of arguments, he submitted that the investigation agency failed to establish any of the alleged charges and the investigating officer without conducting proper investigation, roped accused persons into this crime. He pointed out that none of the alleged injured witnesses attributed specific overt acts against any of the accused persons and they gave a blanket like statement that all the accused beat them with hands and sticks and the medical officer/Pw.9 who examined Pws.1 to 6, deposed in his cross examination that no
Spl.SC 9-2019 14 of 21 police accompanied these injured persons to the Hospital and he admitted in his further cross-examination that he kept blank most of the columns of the wound certificates marked as Ex.P8 to Ex.P13.
According to the learned defence counsel, Pws.1 to 6 did not sustainwd any injuries and this medical officer/Pw.9 gave false certificates at the instance of police. He also pointed out that the reason for alleged incident in this case is to shift lovers from the scene of offence village by Pw.1 in his Car to Hyderabad to enable them to get their marriage performed there against the wishes of their parents, because that marriage is an inter-caste marriage.
11.1 st CHARGE :- Under Section 342 r/w 149 IPC
The allegation is that on 12.11.2018 A1 to A16 and others wrongfully confined Pws.1 and 2 from 11.00 a.m., to almost 10.30 p.m. and they were forcibly taken to Nizamabad and searched in lodges for knowing whereabouts said newly married couple by names Ravinder and Prashanthi and A1 to A16 have taken them to
Morthad and confined them for some time near Guest House of
Sunil Reddy (2nd scene of offence) and from there to Durga temple and thereafter to Gandhi statue, where the last incident of beating
Pws.3 to 6 also taken place. But as rightly pointed out by the learned defence counsel except examining Pws.1 and 2, no other witness either from Nizamabad or Morthad is examined to support the evidence of Pws.1 and 2 victims with regard to their wrongful confinement with common objection. The investigating officer/Pw.11 admitted in his cross-examination that he did not examine any neighbours of the said scene of offences. He also deposed in his cross-examination that Pws.1 and 2 did not furnish
Car numbers involved in this case. So, it is difficult to accept the
Spl.SC 9-2019 15 of 21 allegation of the prosecution that Pws.1 and 2 were confined wrongully from 11.00 a.m. to 10.30 p.m. and taken them to
Nizamabad and Morthad. So without any hesitation, it can be held that the prosecution failed to establish the 1 st charge.
12.2 nd CHARGE:- Under Section 363 r/w 149 IPC
Since Pws.1 and 2 are above age of 18 years. This charge is unwarranted, hence it can be held that prosecution failed to establish this 2nd charge.
13.3 rd AND 8 th CHARGE:- Under Section 324 r/w 149 IPC and 506 r/w 149 IPC:
(a)The allegation of the prosecution is that on 12.11.2018 at 11.00 a.m. A6 called Pw.1 to Rythu Sangam, where A1 to A5 and A7 to A16 and others were available and A6 questioned about whereabouts of said lovers and in that connection A1 to A16 and others beat Pw.1 and threatened with dire consequences and they also called Pw.2 to said Rythu Sangam/1st scene of offence and beat him and then taken them to Nizamabad forcibly in Cars for searching the said lovers. It is also the allegation of the prosecution that on the same day in the evening time at about 7.00 p.m., A1 to
A16 and others beat Pw.3 to Pw.6 in connection with the said marriage between Ravinder and Prashanthi.
(b)In their evidence, Pws.1 to 6 deposed that all the accused beat them black and blue in between 11.00 a.m. and 10.00 p.m. and on the same day at about 11.40 p.m. medical officer/Pw.9 examined them and noted injuries on Ex.P8 to P12 wound certificates. The said medical officer/Pw.9 deposed that he examined Pws.1 to 4 and 6 and issued wound certificates marked as Exs.P8 to P12. In his
Spl.SC 9-2019 16 of 21 evidence, he also deposed that he examined another injured Lw.4 who is no more and noticed a slap over left cheek and he issued
Ex.P13 wound certificate. During his cross-examination, he deposed that he took 10 minutes each to examine each of the above injured persons. In his cross-examination, he admitted that no police accompanied with the said injured persons to his hospital.
(c)It is true with regard to time of offences, Pws.1 and 2 did not depose in their evidence that the 1st incident was started at about 11.00 a.m. Pws.1 and 2 gave date of incident, but failed to disclose time of said incident. However, in the cross-examination, Pw.3 deposed about the time of incident that took place in the night time at about 7.00 p.m. at Gandhi statue, where the last incident has taken place. Pw.3 in his cross-examination to a question put by defence counsel, revealed that Pws.1 and 2 were already present near Gandhi Statue by the time he was taken there by 7.00 p.m.
So, the evidence of Pws.1 to 6 coupled with the evidence of medical officer/Pw.9 inspires confidence in the mind of court that Pws.1 to 6 were beaten and manhandled highhandedly suspecting that they helped said lovers to escape from the village and also to know the whereabouts of said lovers, the accused persons resorted to this beating and intimidating incident. Nothing is elicited to disable the evidence of these 6 injured witnesses who sustained injuries in the incident and the defence counsel tried to attribute that police case is booked due to disputes between Rythu Sangam and Sahakara
Sangam, but invain. The motive for this incident is non other than inter-caste marriage between Ravinder and Prashanthi and to know whereabouts of Prashanthi who is daughter of A12. The learned defence counsel made a futile attempt to attribute that the incident
Spl.SC 9-2019 17 of 21 is with regard to some Ac.5-00 of land left for cattle grazing yard.
The evidence of Pws.1 and 2 inspires confidence in the mind of court that on 12.9.2019 in the noon time, they were called to 1st scene of offence and illtreated them forcing them to reveal whereabouts of said escaped lovers whose actual whereabouts are not known to Pw.1 after their getting down from his Car at
Nizamabad.
(d)The evidence of Pws.3 and 4 who are son and mother shows that the accused persons beat them near Gandhi Statue in the last incident that took place in between 7.00 p.m. and 10.00 p.m. The evidence of Pw.4 who is a woman of 49 years old shows that when she intervened to rescue her son Pw.3, accused beat her. In her cross-examination, she disclosed that said scene of offence at
Gandhi Statue is only 100 meters away from her house. She admitted in her cross-examination that she did not state to police that all the accused assaulted her. However, her evidence clearly shows that on the date of incident, all the accused persons went to her house and took away her son/Pw.3 to Gandhi statue and beat him. It also shows when she intervened to rescue her son, all the accused persons beat her. The evidence of Pw.5 who is no other than father of Pw.2 shows that he noticed many persons gathered near Gandhi statue where his son and other persons are brought there and beat with sticks. He also deposed that when he tried to interfere, he was also beaten up by the accused with hands. So, it appears that accused persons did not leave even women i.e. Pw.4 and Pw.6.
(e)Though the prosecution filed charge sheet against 35 persons, it failed to establish participation of A14, A17 to A35 in the alleged
Spl.SC 9-2019 18 of 21 incident. In Ex.P1 complaint, Pw.1 mentioned names of A1 to A13,
A15 and A16 only and simply stated that some other persons also participated in the incident. In Ex.P1 complaint, Pw.1 mentioned names of Baddam Balreddy as one of the accused, but in the charge sheet name of said Baddam Balreddy is deleted. As per the evidence of Pws.1 and 2, the main person for committing this offence is A6, the evidence on record shows that it was the A6 who called A1 to Rythu Sangam first in the noon time, threatened him with dire consequences questioning to reveal whereabouts of lovers who escaped from the village. Along with A6, A1 to A5, A7 to A13,
A15 and A16 participated in the incidents that took place till night 10.00 p.m. Though the prosecution alleged that the accused persons beat Pws.1 to 6 with dangerous weapon. No dangerous weapon is used as on the date of evidence of Pws.1 to 6. Further, the alleged weapons are marked as Mos.1 to 3 are not shown to witnesses during examination. So, without any hesitation, it can be held that A1 to A6, A8 to A13, A15 and A16 are liable for punishment U/sec.323 IPC for beating Pws.1 to 6 and causing injuries, and also for terrorizing Pws.1 to 6, they are liable for punishment under said charges.
14.5 th to 7 th CHARGES:- U/sec.427, 448, 290 r/w 149 IPC.
(a)As already observed above, the prosecution did not examine any independent witnesses from the locality of house of Pw.6 where the accused alleged to be damaged household goods of Pw.6. So, without any hesitation, it can be held that prosecution failed to establish the alleged charges for the said offences under sections 427, 448, 290 r/w 149 IPC.
Spl.SC 9-2019 19 of 21
15.Last charge :- U/Sec. 3(2)(va) of SCs & STs (Prevention of
Atrocities) Amendment Act-2015.
(a)Admittedly, Pw.1 in his Ex.P1/complaint did not allege anything against the accused persons that accused persons abused him and insulted him by mentioning his caste name. For the first time in his evidence, he deposed that A3 abused him in the name of caste.
Therefore, his evidence in that respect is not acceptable. So, without any hesitation, it can be held that prosecution failed to establish the alleged charge for the said offence under section 3(2) (va) of SCs & STs (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act-2015.
16.Keeping in view the above said discussion, I am of the opinion that the prosecution has established the offences under Section 323 and 506 r/w 149 IPC against A1 to A6, A8 to A13, A15 and A16.
Hence, they are liable for conviction for the said offences. I find all the accused persons not guilty for the remaining charges U/sec.
342, 363, 324, 448, 427 and 290 r/w 149 IPC, and u/s 3(2)(va) of
SCs & STs (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act-2015.
17. Heard A1 to A6, A8 to A13, A15 and A16 about the quantum of sentence to be imposed for which, they all stated that they are agriculturists, having families consisting of wife and children. So, submitting they seek mercy. Taking into consideration the facts of the case and particularly for the motive behind this incident and also the fact that the accused persons are roaming around the courts almost for 3 years, they are entitled to lenient view and imposing fine without imposing any imprisonment would meet the ends of justice.
Spl.SC 9-2019 20 of 21
18.In the result, I find all the accused not guilty for the offences U/sec. 342, 363, 448, 427 and 290 r/w 149 IPC, and
U/sec.3(2)(va) of SCs & STs (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment
Act-2015 and I acquit them for the said offences under Section 235(1) Cr.P.C.
Further, I find A1 to A6, A8 to A13, A15 and A16 guilty for the offences punishable U/sec.323 and 506 r/w 149 IPC and convict them U/sec.235(2) Cr.P.C. Since A6 is main accused in this case as per the evidence of Pws.1 and 2 and he led unlawful assembly for commission of said offences, I sentence A6 to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence U/sec.323 IPC, (in default to pay said fine, he (A6) shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month) and I sentence A6 to pay fine of Rs.50,000/- for the offence U/sec.506 IPC, (in default to pay said fine, he (A6) shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months).
Further, I sentence A1 to A5, A8 to A13, A15 and A16 to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- each for the offence U/sec.323 r/w 149 IPC, (in default to pay said fine, they shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month each) and I sentence A1 to A5, A8 to A13,
A15 and A16 to pay fine of Rs.4,000/- each for the offence U/sec.506 r/w 149 IPC, (in default to pay said fine, they shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months each). Both sentences shall run consecutively.
The sureties and bail bonds of A14, A17 to A35 shall stand cancelled after expiry of six months from this day. Mos.1 to 3 shall be destroyed after appeal time.
Out of the said fine amount of Rs.1,16,000/- if paid, an amount of Rs.40,000/- shall be paid to Pw.1, Rs.10,000/- each shall be paid to Pws.2 to 5 and Rs.20,000/- shall be paid to Pw.6 as victim compensation, after appeal time is over.
Dictated to Stenographer, transcribed and typed by her,
corrected and pronounced by me in open court on this the 29th day of April, 2022.
Sd/-
FAC: Special Sessions Judge for trial of cases, under SCs/STs (PoA) Act, Nizamabad.
Spl.SC 9-2019 21 of 21 -:: APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE ::- Witnesses examined For prosecution For defence
PW.1:Sri Indur Swamy- Nil - PW.2:Sri Boga Pranay PW.3:Sri Chityala Arun PW.4:Smt. Chityala Laxmi Pw.5:Sri Boga Narsaiah Pw.6:Smt. Chityala Annapoorna PW.7:Sri Bojja Kishan PW.8:Sri Neeradi Bhumeshwar PW.9:Sri Dr.S.N. Swamy, MO PW.10:Sri P. Suresh, SI of Police PW.11:Sri A. Ramulu, Addl.SP Exhibits marked For Prosecution: Ex.P1 :Complaint filed by Pw.1
Ex.P2:1st Scene of Offence Panchanama with Rough Sketch Ex.P3:2nd Scene of Offence Panchanama with Rough Sketch Ex.P4:3rd Scene of Offence Panchanama with Rough Sketch Ex.P5:4th Scene of Offence Panchanama with Rough Sketch Ex.P6: 5th Scene of Offence Panchanama with Rough Sketch Ex.P7: Seizure panchanama (of 5 Cars) Ex.P8: Wound certificate of Pw.1 Ex.P9: Wound certificate of Pw.2 Ex.P10:Wound certificate of Pw.3 Ex.P11:Wound certificate of Pw.4 Ex.P12:Wound certificate of Pw.6 Ex.P13:Wound certificate of Lw.4 Ex.P14:FIR in Cr.No.154/2018 of PS Morthad Ex.P15:Wound certificate of Pw.5 Ex.P16:Caste Certificate
For Defence:
Ex.D1: Relevant portion of 161 Cr.P.C. statement of PW.6
Material objects marked
MO.1 : Stick MO.2 : Stick MO.3 : Stick
Sd/-
FAC: Special Sessions Judge for trial of cases, under SCs/STs (PoA) Act, Nizamabad