THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1846 of 2009 Date: 18.11.2009 Between : The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. … Appellant And Malleboina Sreeramulu, S/o. Guruvaiah, Aged 30 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Jujjuiraopeta village, Kusumanchi Mandal, Khammam District. … Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1846 of 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice D.S.R.Varma) Heard learned Public Prosecutor, appearing for the appellant- State as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondent- accused. 2. Appellant is the State and respondent is the sole accused in the Sessions Case. 3. This Criminal Appeal, by the State, under Section 378 (3) and (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity “Cr.P.C.”), is directed against the judgment, dated 08.05.2006, in Sessions Case No.75 of 2002, passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Srikakulam District, acquitting the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 411 and 450 of Indian Penal Code (for brevity “I.P.C.”). 4. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the defacto- complainant lodged a complaint on 17.02.2001 stating that his son Syed Bukari Babu was found killed in the shop on the intervening night of 16/17.02.2001. The said complaint was registered as Crime No.30 of 2001 of Kasibugga Police Station. It was alleged that the deceased-Syed Bukari Babu was running a cloth shop and he was in the habit of keeping cash in the shop itself and in the nights he used to sleep in the shop. The accused was having acquaintance with the deceased and was also now and then used to come to the shop. Because of the said acquaintance, on the fateful night of 16/17.02.2001, the accused came to the shop of the deceased knowing that the cash was in the shop. He hatched a plan, secured an iron flat rod and at about 10-15 p.m., entered into the shop. The deceased allowed the accused into the shop as they both used to sleep in the shop in the nights also, that at around 3-00 a.m. when the deceased was in sound sleep the accused beat the deceased with iron flat rod, killed him and fled away with a cash of Rs.1,90,100/- in a green coloured suit case. Basing on the registration of crime, the police took up investigation and after completion of investigation and necessary formalities, the police laid the charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 411 and 450 I.P.C. 5. When the charges under punishable Sections 302, 411 and 450 I.P.C., were framed, read over and explained to the accused, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 6. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 17 and got marked Exs.P-1 to P- 23, besides marking MOs.1 to 10 material objects. On behalf of the accused, none were examined, except marking Exs.D.1 to D.6, relevant portions of Section 161 Cr.P.C. statements of P.Ws.3, 4, 5, 6 and 7. 7. The Court below, having considered the entire material including the evidence, both oral and documentary, available on record, found the accused not guilty of the offences with which he was charged and accordingly acquitted him of the said charges. Aggrieved by the same, the State has preferred the present criminal appeal. 8. Now, the point that arises for consideration, in this Criminal Appeal is whether the Court below has rightly appreciated the evidence on record before arriving at the conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt? 9. This is totally a case of circumstantial evidence, inasmuch as there was no direct evidence. 10. The Court below arrived at the conclusion that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused, inasmuch as the circumstances on record would only go to show that all the links presented before the Court were not sufficient to connect the accused with the offence. Further that the links are not only incomplete, but there are innumerable missing links in this case. It was further pointed out by the Court below that Ex.P.18-clock room receipt, which is the primary document, was not filed before the Court immediately and the same was found to have materially altered with regard to the date on the document. If it is the case of the prosecution that the accused fled away along with the money from the shop after killing the deceased, there is no reason for the accused to keep the cash in locker as could be seen from Ex.P.18. In fact, Ex.P.18 belongs to some other person by name Sri Ravi Kumar. The relationship between the said Ravi Kumar and the deceased was not established. Therefore, there is any amount of doubt as regards the involvement of the accused in the commission of offence. 11. It is settled law that when the case rests upon the circumstantial evidence, the following aspects have to be proved by the prosecution. “(a) All the circumstances must cogently and firmly be established and all the circumstances should unerringly point out the guilt towards the accused; (b) that those circumstances, if taken cumulatively, should form a chain, so that they complete, so that there was no escape from conclusion that within all the human probability the crime was committed by the accused and none else; and (c) that all the circumstances must be complete and incapable of explanation of hypothesis of the guilt of the accused and should not only be consistent with the guilt of the accused, but should also inconsistent with his innocence.” 12. In the instant case, the expected chain of circumstances connecting the accused with the commission of offence is missing. In the absence of any connecting link, it is unsafe to hold the accused guilty of the offences with which he was charged. 13. Therefore, the reasons assigned by the Court below, while arriving at the conclusion that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt, in our considered view, are cogent and the evidence on record was well appreciated before arriving at such a conclusion. 14. For the foregoing, the criminal appeal fails and is liable to be dismissed as having no merits. 15. In the result, the criminal appeal is dismissed, at the stage of admission, confirming the judgment, dated 08.05.2006, in Sessions Case No.75 of 2002, passed by the Court below. _________________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA __________________________ JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO 18.11.2009 Msr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1846 of 2009 18.11.2009 (Msr)