M. Radha Hari Seshu vs The State Of Telangana

NON­REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.521 OF 2020 [Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.)No.2053 of 2020]

M. Radha Hari Seshu …..Appellant Versus

The State of Telangana …..Respondent

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. This criminal appeal is filed by the appellant­accused,

aggrieved by the order dated 20th March 2019 passed in I.A.No.1

of 2019 in Criminal Appeal No.1325 of 2016 by the High Court

for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. By the aforesaid order,

High Court dismissed the application filed by the appellant

herein under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure

seeking suspension of sentence imposed in Sessions Case No.306

of 2013 by the learned III Additional District & Sessions Judge,

Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar vide judgment dated

Signature Not Verified 14.12.2016. Digitally signed by MEENAKSHI KOHLI Date: 2020.08.14 14:50:45 IST Reason:

3. Based on the complaint dated 07.12.2011 filed by the de

facto complainant a case was registered against the appellant 1 Crl.A.@S.L.P.(Crl.)No.2053 of 2020

and his parents in Crime No.964 of 2011 for the alleged offences

under Sections 498A, 304B and 302, Indian Penal Code (IPC) on

the file of KPHB Police Station, Ranga Reddy District. After

completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed against the

appellant­accused no.1, and his parents – accused nos.2 and 3

for the offence under Sections 304B and 498A, IPC. The learned

XIX Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad took cognizance of the

case against the accused for the offences under Sections 304B

and 498A, IPC and committed it to the Court of Sessions,

Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad. Upon committal, same

was registered as Sessions Case No.306 of 2013 for offences

under Sections 304B and 498A, IPC. The learned III Additional

District & Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar, by

judgment dated 14.12 2016 passed in Sessions Case No.306 of

2013, has convicted the appellant herein for offence under

Sections 304B and 498A of IPC. He was sentenced for

imprisonment of life and to pay fine amount of Rs.5,000/­ with

default clause for the offence under Section 304B and was also

sentenced for a period of three years with a fine amount of

Rs.3,000/­ for the offence under Section 498A of IPC. Accused

nos.2 and 3 in the aforesaid case were discharged on an

application filed by them, as such, appellant alone was tried for

the offence under Sections 498A and 304B, IPC.

2 Crl.A.@S.L.P.(Crl.)No.2053 of 2020

4. As against the conviction recorded and sentence imposed

by the learned III Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ranga

Reddy District, L.B. Nagar, the appellant has preferred appeal

before the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad

and filed I.A.No.1 of 2019 in Criminal Appeal No.1325 of 2016

seeking suspension of sentence and to release the appellant on

bail, pending disposal of the criminal appeal. Such application

filed by the appellant is dismissed by the High Court vide

impugned order.

5. We have heard Sri R. Basant, learned senior advocate

appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel standing

counsel appearing for the State of Telangana.

6. By taking us to the judgment of the Sessions Court and

other material placed on record, it is contended by Sri Basant,

learned senior counsel that though prosecution has utterly failed

to prove the guilt of the appellant­accused for the offence under

Sections 304B and 498A of IPC, by misconstruing the evidence

on record, the trial court has erroneously convicted the

appellant. It is submitted that deceased was married to the

appellant as early as on 13th February 2005 and they were

leading happy married life and were also blessed with two sons.

Further it is submitted that except interested witnesses, the case

of the prosecution is not proved by any independent witness. By 3 Crl.A.@S.L.P.(Crl.)No.2053 of 2020

referring to the provision under Section 304B, IPC it is submitted

by learned senior counsel that there is absolutely no evidence to

show that, soon before her death deceased was subjected to

cruelty or harassment by the appellant­husband. Inspite of the

same, trial court has wrongly convicted the appellant for offence

under Section 304B, IPC and imposed the maximum punishment

of imprisonment for life. Further it is submitted that PW­1 and

PW­2 are the parents of the deceased and PW­3 is a close friend

of the deceased, as such, they are interested witnesses and if

deposition of such witnesses is carefully scrutinised by applying

ratio laid down by this Court in the case of Piara Singh & Ors. v.

State of Punjab1, their testimony was not to be relied on by the

trial court to convict the appellant. Further it is submitted that

inspite of making a strong prima facie case to suspend the

sentence, pending appeal, the High Court has dismissed the

application without recording valid reasons.

7. On the other hand, the learned standing counsel appearing

for the State of Telangana has submitted that by recording valid

reasons the application of the appellant is rejected and there are

no grounds to interfere with the same.

8. Having heard learned counsel on both sides, we have

perused the impugned order and other material placed on record.

1 (1977) 4 SCC 452 4 Crl.A.@S.L.P.(Crl.)No.2053 of 2020

9. In this case it is to be noted that marriage of the deceased

with appellant was performed on 13.02.2005 and they were

blessed with two children. Though initially case was registered

under Sections 304B, 498A and 302, IPC, after investigation the

appellant and his parents were charged under Sections 304B and

498A, IPC. The parents of the appellant herein were discharged

on an application and only appellant was tried for the offence

under Sections 498A and 304B, IPC. It is also brought to our

notice that the appellant is confined in jail from 15 th December

2016 onwards and further it is also brought to our notice that

the father of the appellant was diagnosed with pancolitis.

10. Though learned senior counsel, by taking us to the findings

recorded by the trial court, has submitted that no case is made

out for the offence under Section 304B and he was erroneously

convicted for offence under Section 304B as well as 498A, IPC, in

view of the pendency of the appeal before the High Court, we do

not wish to go into the merits of the matter at this stage.

However, considering the submissions made by the learned

counsel and other material placed on record and further taking

into account that the appellant is in jail since 15 th December

2016, we deem it appropriate that it is a fit case to suspend the

sentence imposed on the appellant and to enlarge the appellant

5 Crl.A.@S.L.P.(Crl.)No.2053 of 2020

on bail, pending Criminal Appeal No.1325 of 2016 before the

High Court.

11. For the aforesaid reasons, this appeal is allowed. Impugned

order dated 20th March 2019 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2019 in

Criminal Appeal No.1325 of 2016 passed by the High Court for

the State of Telangana at Hyderabad, is set aside and we order

that the sentence imposed on the appellant in Sessions Case

No.306 of 2013 by the learned III Additional District & Sessions

Judge, Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar in judgment dated

14.12.2016, shall remain suspended pending disposal of appeal

before the High Court and the appellant shall be released on bail

subject to such conditions to be imposed by the trial court.

Further, we direct that the appellant shall not leave the country

pending disposal of the appeal before the High Court.

………….………………………………..J. [ASHOK BHUSHAN]

….…………………………………………J. [R. SUBHASH REDDY]

New Delhi.

August 14, 2020.

6 Crl.A.@S.L.P.(Crl.)No.2053 of 2020

ITEM NO.14 Court 5 (Video Conferencing) SECTION II S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).2053/2020 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 20-03- 2019 in IA No.1/2019 passed by the High Court For The State Of Telangana At Hyderabad) M. RADHA HARI SESHU Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF TELANGANA Respondent(s) ([HEARD BY: HON. ASHOK BHUSHAN AND HON. R. SUBHASH REDDY, JJ.]) (IA No.32537/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.32536/2020-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES[FOR ORDERS ON 14.08.2020]) Date : 14-08-2020 This matter was called on for pronouncement of order.

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Manoj C. Mishra, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. S.. Udaya Kumar Sagar, AOR Ms. Bina Madhavan, Adv.

Ms. Swati Bhardwaj, Adv.

O R D E R Leave granted.

The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed non-

reportable order.

Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

(ARJUN BISHT) (RENU KAPOOR) COURT MASTER (SH) BRANCH OFFICER

(signed non-reportable order is placed on the file)

7