KONDAPAKA SRIDHAR Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prosecution story commences with a person having left home for Hyderabad, who could not be reached on the telephone, even on the next day. After two days, his father receives a ransom call and instructions to deposit an amount of Rs.2,00,000.00 in an account in a bank. Two days later, father-PW1 lodges a complaint (Exhibit P1) with the police and also deposits an amount of Rs.1,50,000.00 in the account of one Geetanjali. Analyzing the calls between the two phone numbers, the Investigating Officer (I.O) was led to A6, who was arrested. A6 is said to have pointed out a flat, inside which the missing person's body was recovered, tucked away in a refrigerator. A6 also confessed about the involvement of A1 to A5.

(2.) Six persons were arrayed as accused responsible for the kidnapping and murder. A4 died in the course of trial and A1, A2, A3, A5 and A6 stood convicted and sentenced by the Trial Court. The High Court acquitted A2, A3, A5 and A6 but affirmed the conviction of A1. The conviction was on the sole testimony of PW3 and the circumstance of A1 having not explained the presence of the body inside the apartment he leased out, found to be incriminating under Sec. 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1862[Hereinafter referred to as 'the Evidence Act'].

(3.) The story projected by the prosecution on the confessions elicited from the accused was that, A1 was a habitual criminal who met A4 while both were in jail. On release from the prison, A1 took up residence at Siricilla, from where A4 hailed and they indulged in politics. A1 developed intimate relationship with A2, who was a tenant in the house of the deceased who too had an illicit relationship with A2. A1 and A2 hatched a plot to kidnap the deceased for ransom since A2 informed A1 that his father had the wherewithal to pay the ransom. Though, A2 tried to lure him into the flat where she was staying with A1, the deceased could not come, due to his personal commitments. Later, A1 is said to have married A3, with whom also he had intimacy and then A1, together with A3 to A6 hatched the plan to carry out the kidnapping of the deceased, which led to the murder.