IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 62 OF 2008 Between: Goddanla Eeranna @ Vadde Eranna … Appellant-A1 V/s. The State of Andhra Pradesh Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad. … Respondent-Complainant Counsel for the appellant : Sri E. Venkat Reddy Counsel for the respondent : Addl.Public Prosecutor The Court made the following judgment :(judgment follows2nd page) THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 62 OF 2008 JUDGMENT : Aggrieved of the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Special Judge under the SCs & STs (POA) Act-cum- I- Additional Sessions Judge, Adilabad, in SC.No.17 of 2007 dated 04- 12-2007, whereby and whereunder the appellant-A1 was convicted for the offences under section 354, 294 (b) of IPC and Section 3 (1) (x) of SCs/STs (POA) Act, 1989 and sentenced him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of five years and imposed a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month, this Criminal Appeal is filed by A-1. 2. The facts, in brief, are as follows: A-1 is a resident of Kothaguda village. A-2 is his sister. PW-1 is also a resident of Kothaguda village. She belongs to lambada caste which is a scheduled tribe. On 07-09-2006 at about 06:30 p.m., while PW-1 Laudya Kavitha was at her house, A-1 came to her in a drunken condition, abused her in vulgar language in the name of her caste as “Lambada lanja”. A-1 has also stated that he will keep her elder sister as concubine, as her marriage was not performed since long time. When PW-1 was questioned about his high handedness, A-1 caught hold of her hand and pulled her with an intention to outrage her modesty. When PW-1 raised hue and cry, her sister and parents came there. On seeing them, the accused fled away from that place. He again came along with A-2 and both ofthem abused the family members of PW-1 in obscene words in a public place as “Lambada lanja”, meeku baga masthi vachinde. The same is witnessed by the neighbours namely, Madhyala Narsaiah, Pawar Narsing, Chelmela Dhanraj and others. On 08-9-2006 at about 06:00 p.m., PW-1 went to the police station and presented Ex.P1 report to PW-8. He in turn registered a case in Cr.No. 155 of 2006 under section 354, 294 (b) IPC and section 3 (1) (x) of SCs/STs (POA) Act, 1989 and issued FIR. PW-7 was appointed as Investigating Officer in this case by the Superintendent of Police on 10-9-2006. During the course of investigation, he visited the scene of offence which is situated near Kothaguda check post. He examined PW-1 and other witnesses and recorded their statements. He prepared a rough sketch and conducted scene of offence panchanama in the presence of PWs 6 and another. On 15-9-2006 the Sub-Inspector of Police appreheneded A-1 and A-2 and produced them before PW-7. He in turn interrogated them and on their confession, their arrest was effected and they were produced for judicial remand. Caste Certificates of PW-1 and A-1 and A-2 were collected from the Mandal Revenue Officer, Utnoor. The evidence collected during the course of investigation established that A-1 abused PW-1 in the name of her caste and that he has also caught hold of her hand with an intention to outrage her modesty and A-1 and A-2 have also abused the family members of PW-1 in obscene words in a public place and as such both of them are liable for punishment. 3. The case was taken cognizance by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Utnoor against both the accused in PRC.No. 24 of 2006. On appearance of both the accused, the learned Magistrate complied with the provisions of section 207 Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate after satisfying with the material placed before him felt that the accusation made against A-1 and A-2 is supported by material, since the offence is triable by a Special Court, therefore, the learned Magistrate committed PRC.No.24 of 2006 to the Special Court for disposal according to law. 4. The case was taken cognizance by the learned trial Judge in SC.No. 17 of 2007. Since A-1 was absent for a long time, NBW was issued against him and the case against A-1 was separated on 01-6-2007 and numbered as Spl.SC.No. 29 of 2007. On 08-6-2007 A- 1 was produced on execution of NBW. On 20-6-2007 the case against A-1 i.e,. Spl.SC.No. 29 of 2007 was clubbed. When A-1 and A-2 appeared before the trial Court, the prosecution and the accused were heard and they were examined under section 239 Cr.P.C. and Charges under section 354 IPC against A-1, section 294 (b) IPC and section 3 (1) (x) of SCs/STs (POA) Act, 1989 were framed, read over and explained to them in Telugu, A-1 and A-2 pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 5. To substantiate its case, the prosecution examined PWs 1 to 8 and marked Exs.P1 to P11. On behalf of the accused, no oral and documentary evidence was adduced. 6. After closure of the prosecution evidence, A-1 and A-2 were examined under section 313 Cr.P.C., for the incriminating evidence appearing against them. Both the accused denied the same and pleaded that they are innocent and that they did not commit any offence. Further both the accused submitted that they have no defence witnesses. 7. On appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence placed on record, the learned trial Judge found A-1 guilty of the offence under section 354 IPC and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for five years for the offence under section 354 IPC and imposed a fine of Rs.500/- in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. He was also sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one year for the offence under section 3 (1) (x) of SCs/STs (POA) Act, 1989 and imposed a fine of Rs.500/, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. Further he was found guilty of the offence under section 294 (b) IPC and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. A-2 was found not guilty of the offence under section 294 (b) IPC and section 3 (1) (x) of SCs/STs (POA) Act, 19889 and she was acquitted under section 235 (1) Cr.P.C. A2 was in judicial custody and she was directed to be set at liberty forthwith if she is not required in any other case. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Special Judge under the SCs & STs (POA) Act-cum- I-Additional Sessions Judge, Adilabad, in SC.No.17 of 2007 dated 04-12-2007, whereby and whereunder the appellant-A1 was convicted for the offences under section 354, 294 (b) of IPC and Section 3 (1) (x) of SCs/STs (POA) Act, 1989 and sentenced him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of five years and imposed a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month, this Criminal Appeal is filed by A-1. 8. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-A-1 as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State and perused the records. 9. At the hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant-A1 submitted that A-1 is in prison for more than three years. Even though as per section 354 IPC the minimum punishment prescribed is five years but for special reasons that can be for less than five years. He further submitted that the appellant is the only bread-winner of his family and he has to look after his wife and children. 10. Taking into consideration of the fact that the crime took place in the year 2006 and that the appellant-A1 is in prison for the last more than three years, this Court is of the view that the conviction imposed by the trial Court is confirmed but the sentence of rigorous imprisonment is reduced from five years to three years and accordingly the sentence is reduced to three years and the period already undergone by the appellant-A1 is set off under section 428 Cr.P.C. As far as the imposition of fine amount is concerned, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the same. Hence, the imposition of fine amount shall remain unaltered. The appellant-A1 shall be set at liberty, if he is not required in any other case. 11. Subject to the above modification in the sentence, the Criminal Appeal is disposed of. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO 19-01-2011 I s L THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 62 of 2008 Circulation No. 72 Date: 19-01-2011 Court Master: I s L