Akula Ramu v. The State of Telangana
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: K.SURENDER
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2024-11-20. Akula Ramu v. The State of Telangana. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
[ 3251 I IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURENDER CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 223 OF 2022 Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Cr. P. C. , aggrieved by the Judgment daled O8. 12. 2021passed in S. C. PCS No. 1 19 ot 2017 on the file of the Court of the Special Session Judge for Trial Of Cases Under Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Ac| 2012, Hyderabad. Between: Akula Ramu, S/o. A. Krishna, Aged about 25 Years, Occ. Unemployee, R/o. H No. 30FF, read building, Singadikunta, Kavadiguda, Hyderabad ... AppellanUAccused AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad. ... RespondenURespondent lA NO: 1 OF 2023 il Petition under Section 437 & 439 of Cr. P.
C praying that in the circumstances lr stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail by suspending the judgment in SC PCS No. 119 of I. 2017 on the file of the Court of the Special Sessions Judge for Trial of Cases Under Protection of Children From Sexual offences Acl 2012 Hyderabad dated o8. 12. 2021. I Counsel for the Appellant : Sri A Jagan Counsel for the Respondent: Sri M Vivekananda Reddy, Assistant Public Prosecutor The Court delivered the following: Judgment THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURENDER CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 223 OF 2022 JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed by the appellant aggrieved by the Judgment, dated 08. 12. 202 1 passed in S. C. PCS. No.
119 of 2Ol7 on the file of Special Sessions Judge For Trial Of Cases Under Protection Of Children From Sexual Offences Act,2012, Hyderabad, wherein the appellant was found guilty for the ,tffence under Section 5(1) r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 and Sections 448, 417 and 376 (2\ (n) of I. P. C. ald sentenced him for the aforeszLid offences as follows:- 1 U/s 6 of the To undergo 20 years rigorous POCSO Act imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 1O,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months 2 U/s, 448 IPC To undergo one year rigorous 1m risonment 3 U/s. 417 IPC To undergo one year rigorous 1m risonment A11 the sentences shall run concurrently. 2. Briefly the case of the prosecution is that P\[rl, who is the victim, was acquainted with the appellant one year prior to lodging of the complaint. According to her, the appellant followed her stating that he ioves her and will marry her.
She also accepted his l' love and when the relation between PWl and appellant was observed by their elders, she was warned by her parents and asked PWl not to talk to the appellant. On one Sunday when there was no one in the house, appellant allegedly went to her house and committed forceful sexual intercourse. Thereafter the appellant used to go to her house on every Sunday and forcefully had sexual I intercourse with her. PW I came to know that the appellant's marriage was fixed with some other girl. PWl confronted the appellant. However, the appellant married some other woman. One month after the marriage, she missed her periods and she was taken to the hospital. After the scanning test, it was informed that PW1 was carrying five months pregnancy. PWl informed her mother that the appellant was responsible for the pregnancy. I Thereafter, Ex. P1 was filed alleging that the appellalt committed rape on PWl.
During the investigation, in the month of July, 2016, she gave birth to a baby boy. After one and half month of the birth, the boy died. The body of the boy was sent for postmortem examination and DNA test. According to Ex. P7, it was concluded that the appellant was the biological father of the boy and PW1 the biological mother. J 3 The learned Sessions Judge, placing relia,nce on the evidence of the PW1 and also the certificate issued under Ex. P. 17 by PW17, reflecting the date of birth as 17. 01. 2000 fcund that as on the date of the incident, PW1 was a minor. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellalt would submit that there was consensual sex in between PW 1 and the appellant. In fact, the age that was given under Ex. p 17 was incorrect and PWl was major at the time of incident. The learned counsel relied upon the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supr,:me Court in Sunder Lal Pappu Ql @ Vishal os. State of Chhattisgarh (CRA. No. 352 of 2024, dated 05. 07.
2024), wherein it is held as under:- "76. Recentlg, in case of P, Yuaaprakash I/s. State represented bg Inspector of Pollce, 2023 (SCC Online) SC 846, Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in para 14 to 77 as under : "74. Section 94 (2)(iil) oJ the JI Act clearlg indicates that the d. ate of birth certiJicate Jrom the school or matriculation or equiaalent certificate bg the concerned examination board has to be preJerred. Jirstlg in the absence o;f uhich the birth certlticate iss-ued bg the Corporation or Municipal Authoritg or Panchagat and it ls onlg thereaJter in the o. bsence oJ these ,,an such d. ocuments the age is to be detertnlned through ossification test" or "ang other latest medical. age detertnination test" conducted. on the orders oJ the concerned. authoritg, i. e. Comrnittee or Board. or Court. In the present case, conced. edlg, onlg a transfer certficdte and not the d. ate of birth certlfi. cdte or matriculadon or equiaatent certillcate was consid. ered. Ex. C7, i. e.
, the school transfer certiJicate shoued. the date of birth oJ the aictim as 11. 02. 7997. Significantlg, the transJer certiJicate uas produced not bg the prosec'ution but insteo"d. bg the court summoned. urftness, i. e. , CW-7. The burd. en is alwags upon the prosecution to establish tDhat it alleges; tlgreJore, the prosecution could not hann been Jallen ba. ck upon a doc-um"ent uhich it had. never relied upon. Furthennore, DW-s, the concertted Reaenue Official (Deputg Tahsildar) had stated on oath that the recorQ. s gear 7997 Jor the in respect to the births and deaths toere missing. Stnce it did. not dnsurer to the description of ang class of d. ocuments ,nentioned in Section 94(2)(t) a. s it tDd. s a. ntere trdnsler certiticate, Ex C-7 could. not hane been relied. upon to hotd that M uas below 78 gears dt tle tin@ oJ comtnission o;f the o. fJence. 75. In a recent decision, in Rishipal Siagh Solcnki vs. State of Uttar Pra. d. esh & Ors. this court outlined.
the procedure to be Jolloued. in ccses uhere age determindtion is required. The court uas dealing uith Rule 72 o;f the erstuhile Juaenile Justice Rutes (which is in pari materia) uith Section 94 of the JJ Act, and held as Jollous: "2O. Rule 72 of the . Lf Rules, 2OOT dea. Is with the procedure to be follound. in d. etennination oJ dge. The juaenilitg oJ a person in conJTict utith lana had to be d. ecided. prtma Jacie on the basis of phgsical appedrdnce, or d. oc-uments, if anmitahle. But q. n inquiry into the determination of dge bg the Court or the Jl Board. uqs bg seeking evidence bg obtaining: (i) the m@tricula. tion or equlvalent certificdtes, if auailable and in the absence whereo. f; (ii) the d. ate of birth certift. cate the frorn school (other than a plag school) lirst attended; and in the absence uhereof; (iii) the birth certilicate gioen bg a corporation or a municipal o. uthoritg or a panchagat.
Onlg in the absence o;f either (i), (ii) and (iii) aboae, the medical opinion could be squght Jrom a dulg constituted. Medicat Board to declare the age of the juvenile or child. It uas also protided thdt uhile detennination ud. s being made, beneJit could be given to the chitd or juaenile bg consid. ertng the age on louxir side within the margln of one gear. " 76. Speaking about y*ooisiotts oJ the Juaenite Justice Act, especiallg the aarious options in Section 94 (4 of the Jf Act, this court held in Sanjeeu Kuma. r Gupta as. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors thdt: "Clause (i) of Section 94 (2) ptaces the date of birth certiJicate Jrom the school and. the rrn,atriculation or equiualent certificate (12) Jrom the 2021 SCR 5O2 [2019] 9 SCR 735 concerned examination board in the sdme category (natnelg (i) aboaeL In the absence thereof category provides Jor fti) obtaining the birth certificate of the corporation, municipal ) authoritg or pdnchagat.
It is onlg in the absence of (i) and (ii) that age determination bg means oJ medical anclysis is provided. Section 94(2)(d)(i) indicates a significant change oaer the prolrisions ttthich uere contained in Rule 12(3)(a) of the Rules of 2OO7 rnade under the Act of 2OOO. Under Rule 12(3)(a)(i) the natricula,tion or equiualent certiJicate uas gioen precedence and. it uas onlg in the eaent oJ the certificdte not being aaaila. ble tho;t the date o;f birth cettiJic@te jtom the school first attended, could. be obtqined. In Section 94(2)(i) both the date of birth certiJicate from the school as uell as the matriculation or equivalent certiJicate are placed in the same category. 77. In Abuzar . Elossain @ Gulam llosscin Vs. Stote oJ West Bengal, this court, through a three-Judge bench, held that the burden of proaing that someone ls a Juoenlle (or below the prescribed age) is upon the person claiming it. Fltfthe4 in that decision, the court indicated the hierarchg of documents that uould be d.
ccepted. in ord. er of preference. " 5. It is not in dispute that the victim girl was no1, subjected to any ossification test but age determining test. During the course of investigation reliance was placed on EXP. 13 and EXP. 17, which is bonafide certificate. PW17, who issued certificate state(l as follows: "In the gear 2076 I utas Head Master o:f that School, Police oisited our school on 7O. O2. 2O21 obtaining bonalide certificate. Prior to that for police neoer came to our school, In the gear 2006 or 2OO7 I uas not the head mdster of the school hence, I do not Knoto uthether ang supporting document lllcs giaen bg the parents of the girl Shrrshirekaha at the tirne of ddmission ds proof of her date of btrth. As per the register EX:P. 16 the identitg particulars oJ the uictim girl were not mentioned. Except ndme and her father's caste no other details utere mentioned. It is true in the caste column under BC Velama ls written in Telugu after striking it off Yenjara is utritten.
There uas no initirrl under the correction. In the rrdmission register mother's ndme ol the aictim girl is not ,nen:tioned. But in the bonafied cetiifi. cdte mother's ndme of the dctim girl is mentioned, as Lakshmi". 6. As held in case of P,Yuvaprakash us. State represented bg Inspector of Police, 20231 the Hon'ble Supreme Court found that on the basis of bonaiide certificate without there being any date of birth certificate of the first school attended or birth certificate given by municipal corporation or municipal authority, the option left open to the prosecution was to send the victim girl for ossification test. No such ossification test was conducted as already discussed. Further, the prosecution also relied on trx. P13 age certificate which is issued on the basis of dental examination by PW15. The margin of error in such cases of age determination could be + or 2 years, according to the judgment - of the Honble Supreme Court.
In the circumstalces also if the age of PWl is taken as 17 +2 19 years, even then evidence of PW15 is not available to the prosecution case to prove that girl is below 18 years. Since the age of victim girl could not be conclusively proved to be a minor, the question of attracting the provisions of POCSO Act does not arise. 7 Even according to PW1 victim, she and appellant were having affair and she had sexual intimacy over a period of time I (SCC Onllne)Sc 846 resulting in her pregnancy. Titl the time her preS,nancy being detected afte r being taken to the hospital, she di'1 not reveal anything against the appellalt that she was forcefuliy raped or that the appellant has trespassed into her house to commit rape' plegnancy was 8 The cornplaint appears to be made since the t I detected. In the said circumstances, it cannot be said that the offence of rape is made out nor the offence under S':ction 448 of IPC g. The fact remains that PW1 was induced on the premise of the marriage.
However, appeliant having physical intimacy with PW1, married alother woman. The offence under Sr:ction 417 of IPC is made out. 10 The conviction under Section 417 of IPC is sustained. Hor,r,ever, conviction under Section 6 of POCSO Act an'1 Section 448 of IPC are hereby set aside. 1 1 . It is informed that the appellant is in jail. Since the conviction under Section 417 of IPC is for one year, it is directed that the appellant shall be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case. & I I li 72. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal is partly allowed As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stald closed L SD/. M VIJAYA BHASKER, JOINT REGISTRAR. //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Special Session Judge for Trial Of Cases Under Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Acl, 2012, Hyderabad 2. The Station House Officer, Gandhinagar Police Station, Hyderabad 3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Chenchalguda( By Special Messenger) 4.
Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] 5- One CC to Sri A Jagan, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CD Copies ADK HIGH COURT DATED:2011112024 JUDGMENT '{ t{E s T,{ GRLA. No. 223 of 2022 & fr o c Y x\ <i "f '( J . J ,1", ll 2 1 l'l[v 2[21 () { * c i:l ;/' PARTLY ALLOWING THE CRLA )5y\ 1\
Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.