{"id":222997,"date":"1973-04-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1973-04-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973"},"modified":"2016-07-09T00:13:18","modified_gmt":"2016-07-08T18:43:18","slug":"neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973","title":{"rendered":"Neti Sreeramulu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 2 April, 1973"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Neti Sreeramulu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 2 April, 1973<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1973 AIR 2551, \t\t  1973 SCR  (3) 844<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: I Dua<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Dua, I.D.<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nNETI SREERAMULU\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT02\/04\/1973\n\nBENCH:\nDUA, I.D.\nBENCH:\nDUA, I.D.\nMATHEW, KUTTYIL KURIEN\n\nCITATION:\n 1973 AIR 2551\t\t  1973 SCR  (3) 844\n 1974 SCC  (3) 314\n CITATOR INFO :\n R\t    1974 SC 799\t (15)\n E&amp;D\t    1989 SC1335\t (62)\n\n\nACT:\nIndian\tPanel  Code, s. 302-Accused  convicted\tfor  murder-\nWhether\t  sentence  to\tbe  reduced  from  death   to\tlife\nimprisonment.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nAppellant, aged 20, was convicted and sentenced to death for\nmurdering  his wife on October 30, 1971 and the\t High  Court\nconfirmed  the\tdeath  sentence on January  24,\t 1972.\t The\nappeal\tto  this Court was limited only to the\tquestion  of\nsentence.\nIn the High Court it was argued that the sentence should  be\nreduced\t to life imprisonment because, the appellant  was  a\nyoung  man  of 20 years of age, the incident arose out\tof\nsexual\tjealousy and the crime was not\tpre-meditated.\t The\nHigh  Court  did  not consider\tthese  circumstances  to  be\nsufficient to merit a lesser sentence.\nIn  this Court it was contended that appellant\tacted  under\ngrave provocation and secondly, the Courts below had ignored\nthe effect of the recent amendment of s. 357 Cr.P.C.\nAllowing the appeal,\nHELD  : (1) While confirming the capital sentence, the\tHigh\nCourt  has an obligation to itself to consider why  sentence\nshould\tbe imposed and should not be content with the  trial\ncourt's\t decision on the point.\t It is the duty of the\tHigh\nCourt  to consider the proceedings in all their aspects\t and\ncome  to an independent conclusion on the  materials,  apart\nfrom the view expressed by the Sessions Judge., In so doing,\nthe High Court will be assisted by the opinion expressed  by\nthe Sessions Judge but the law requires that the High  Court\nshould come to an independent conclusion of its own. [847E]\nJumman\t&amp;  others v. The State of Punjab, A.I.R.  1957\tS.C.\n469, referred to.\n(ii)In\tthe  present  case, assuming  the  trial  court\t was\njustified  in imposing the capital sentence, the long  lapse\nof time since the imposition of the capital sentence by\t the\ntrial  court and the consideration of the question  by\tthis\nCourt,\tconstitutes  a\trelevant  ground  for  reducing\t the\nsentence to life imprisonment.\tThe appellant must have been\nin  the\t condemned  cell ever since the\t death\tpenalty\t was\nimposed\t on him.  The appellant must have been subjected  to\nacute mental agony ever since the death penalty was  imposed\non him.\t Therefore, the sentence of capital punishment\tmust\nbe reduced to life imprisonment in the present case. [848C]\nin Piare Dusadh &amp; Others v. Emperor A.I.R. 1944 F.C. 1,\t the\nsentence  of death was reduced to one of transportation\t for\nlife  when  the\t convict  had  inter  alia,  been   awaiting\nexecution of death sentence for over a year.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>CRIMINAL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 50  of<br \/>\n1973.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">845<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Appeal\tby special leave from the judgment and\torder  dated<br \/>\nJanuary 24, 1972 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Cr.  A.<br \/>\nNo. 796 of 1971 and Referred Trial No. 9 of 1971.<br \/>\nO. P. Rana, for the appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\nDUA,  J.-In this appeal from the judgment and order  of\t the<br \/>\nAndhra\tPradesh High Court convicting the appellant for\t the<br \/>\nmurder\tof  one\t Gadusula Seetha under s.  302,\t I.P.C.\t and<br \/>\nsentencing him to death, special leave granted by this Court<br \/>\nwas   limited  only  to\t the  question\tof  sentence.\t The<br \/>\npreparation of the record was dispensed with and the  appeal<br \/>\nwas  directed to be heard on the S.L.P. paper book.  In\t the<br \/>\norder  granting\t special leave dated March 1,  1973  it\t was<br \/>\nspecifically directed as under :\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t      &#8220;Let  an actual date of hearing of the  appeal<br \/>\n\t      be  fixed ,which will not be longer  than\t one<br \/>\n\t      month  from  today, and notice of\t the  actual<br \/>\n\t      date of hearing of the appeal shall be sent to<br \/>\n\t      the respondent forthwith.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Earlier, on July 5, 1972 the special leave petition has been<br \/>\nplaced\tbefore\tthe  vacation Judge (K.\t K.  Mathew  J)\t and<br \/>\nnotice\twas directed to go to the respondent to\t show  cause<br \/>\nwhy  special  leave should not be granted in regard  to\t the<br \/>\nsentence only.\tIt is unfortunate that the matter could\t not<br \/>\nbe  placed  before the Bench after service  of\t&#8216;show  cause<br \/>\nnotice\tfor  nearly eight months.  The\tappellant  had\tbeen<br \/>\nsentenced  to death as far back as October 30, 1971  by\t the<br \/>\nAdditional  Sessions Judge, West Godavari Division at  Eluru<br \/>\nand  the death sentence was confirmed by the High Court.  on<br \/>\nJanuary 24, 1972..\n<\/p>\n<p>The  prosecution  story as upheld by the High  Court  stated<br \/>\nbriefly\t is that the deceased, who was a married woman,\t was<br \/>\nhaving :an illicit intimacy with the appellant and they were<br \/>\nboth living at Tadimalla.  Before they came to Tadmalla\t to<br \/>\nsettle down there, the deceased was married to one Basavaiah<br \/>\nof  Eythapuram.\t There, she had developed  illicit  intimacy<br \/>\nwith her husband&#8217;s brother and is stated to have eloped with<br \/>\nhim.   Sometime later, she patched up with her\thusband\t and<br \/>\nthey  both then went down to Tadimalla to live there,  which<br \/>\nwas the native village of the deceased.\t But there also\t the<br \/>\ndeceased  developed illicit intimacy with the appellant\t who<br \/>\nbelonged  to  Harijan community.   Apparently  the  deceased<br \/>\nbelonged  to a higher caste.  It appears that the  appellant<br \/>\nand the deceased started living together in a portion of the<br \/>\nappellant&#8217;s  house  in\tHarijanwada  of\t Tadimalla  village.<br \/>\nAccording to the testimony of Osha Tharmaiah (P.W. 14)\teven<br \/>\n,when  the  deceased was living with the appellant  she\t was<br \/>\nhaving\ta liaison with this witness.  The deceased met\twith<br \/>\nher death on<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">846<\/span><br \/>\nApril  24, 1971 at about 6 a.m. About 20 days prior to\tthis<br \/>\ndate,  the deceased left the appellant&#8217;s house\tand  started<br \/>\nliving in a portion of the house of Gapapati Bapanamma (P.W.\n<\/p>\n<p>13),  the maternal grandmother of Osha Thammaiah (P.W.\t14).<br \/>\nAccording-  to\tP.W.  14 the deceased did  so  in  order  to<br \/>\ncontinue  her  illicit\tintimacy  with\tthat  witness.\t The<br \/>\nappellant  apparently  felt distressed on  account  of\tthis<br \/>\nconduct\t on  the part of the deceased.\tOn  the\t morning  of<br \/>\nApril  14, 1971, the deceased went to the Panchayat well  to<br \/>\ntake water to her house and while she was standing there  on<br \/>\nthe  platform of the well, the appellant went there,  caught<br \/>\nhold  of  her pig-tail from behind with his  left  hand\t and<br \/>\ndelivered two blows on the left side,, of her neck and\tgave<br \/>\ntwo or three blows on her left upper fore-arm.\tThe deceased<br \/>\ntried  to  free herself from the appellant&#8217;s grip  but\tfell<br \/>\ndown flat about six yards away from the well.  The appellant<br \/>\nis said to have delivered another blow with the knife on the<br \/>\nleft  side of her abdomen which resulted in  her  intestines<br \/>\nprotruding out.\t The deceased it appears died soon after the<br \/>\nreceipt of these injuries.\n<\/p>\n<p>In  the High Court on behalf of the appellant it was  argued<br \/>\nthat  the  sentence should be reduced to  life\timprisonment<br \/>\nbecause(1)  the\t appellant is a very young man of  about  20<br \/>\nyears of age; (2) the incident arose out of sexual jealously<br \/>\nand (3) the crime was not pre-meditated.  The High Court did<br \/>\nnot consider these circumstances to be sufficient to merit a<br \/>\nlesser sentence, because from the evidence of the doctor and<br \/>\nthe. postmortem certificate given by him it was evident that<br \/>\nthe appellant had inflicted as many as ten incised  injuries<br \/>\nout  of\t which\ttwo  injuries  were  fatal  and\t even  after<br \/>\ninflicting the injuries on the deceased indiscriminately the<br \/>\nappellant stabbed her in the abdomen With such violence that<br \/>\nthe intestines actually came out and this happened after the<br \/>\ndeceased  had fallen down.  From the injuries caused by\t the<br \/>\nappellant  to  the  deceased the High Court  felt  that\t the<br \/>\naccused\t must have intended to murder her and his  intention<br \/>\nin  attacking  the deceased was only to chastise her  or  to<br \/>\nteach  her  a  lesson.\t Finding no  reason  to\t reduce\t the<br \/>\nsentence passed by the trial court the High Court  confirmed<br \/>\nthe capital sentence.\n<\/p>\n<p>In  this Court it was contended on behalf of  the  appellant<br \/>\nthat  there was grave provocation for the appellant in\tthat<br \/>\nthe  appellant\thad  sacrified everything for  the  sake  of<br \/>\nkeeping the deceased with him but she had proved  unfaithful<br \/>\nand  had not only started living with someone else  but\t had<br \/>\neven  ridiculed him.  It was also contended that the  courts<br \/>\nbelow  had  completely\tignored the  effect  of\t the  recent<br \/>\namendment  of s.357, Cr.  P.C. and that they have  proceeded<br \/>\nas if there must be some mitigating circumstance in order to<br \/>\njustify the. imposition of a lesser penalty in case of\tcon-<br \/>\nviction under s. 302, I.P.C.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">847<\/span><\/p>\n<p>The learned additional Sessions Judge, when dealing with the<br \/>\nquestion of sentence observed that there were &#8220;absolutely no<br \/>\nextenuating  circumstances to justify imposition  of  lesser<br \/>\nsentence&#8221;.   No\t doubt, according to the  trial\t court,\t the<br \/>\nmurder\twas committed in broad day-light in the presence  of<br \/>\nmany persons in the heart of the Harijanwada and nothing had<br \/>\ntranspired  on\tthe day of the occurrence which\t could\thave<br \/>\nconceivably given any provocation to the appellant so as  to<br \/>\nincite\thim  to\t commit\t the  offence  and  the\t murder\t was<br \/>\ncommitted  in cold blood with pre-meditation.  But  it\tdoes<br \/>\nappear to us that the learned additional Sessions Judge\t was<br \/>\nperhaps\t not  fully  conscious\tof  the\t amendment  and\t his<br \/>\napproach  suggests that he was looking for  some  mitigating<br \/>\ncircumstance  to justify the imposition of  lesser  penalty.<br \/>\nHaving found none, the capital sentence was imposed.<br \/>\nIn  the\t High Court also when the question of  sentence\t was<br \/>\nraised it was observed as follows :\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t      &#8220;It  is  clear that the  accused\tintended  to<br \/>\n\t      murder  the  deceased.   We do  not  find\t any<br \/>\n\t      reason  to reduce the sentence passed  by\t the<br \/>\n\t      lower court.  We confirm the sentence.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>While  confirming  the capital sentence the High  Court\t had<br \/>\nquite clearly an obligation to itself consider what sentence<br \/>\nshould &#8216;be imposed and not be content with the trial court&#8217;s<br \/>\ndecision  on  the  point unless some reason  was  shown\t for<br \/>\nreducing  that sentence.  As observed in Jumman &amp; others  v.<br \/>\nThe  State of Punjab(1), in such a case, &#8220;it is the duty  of<br \/>\nthe  High  Court to consider the proceedings  in  all  their<br \/>\naspects\t and  come  to\tan  independent\t conclusion  on\t the<br \/>\nmaterials,  apart  from the view expressed by  the  Sessions<br \/>\nJudge.\tIn so doing, the High Court will be assisted by\t the<br \/>\nopinion expressed by the Sessions Judge, but under the\tpro-<br \/>\nvisions of the law above-mentioned it is for the High  Court<br \/>\nto come to an independent conclusion of its own.&#8221;<br \/>\nNo  doubt, as observed by the High Court there were as\tmany<br \/>\nas ten incised injuries on the deceased and injuries nos.  1<br \/>\nand  4 were considered by the medical evidence to be  fatal.<br \/>\nIt is also clear that on the day of the incident nothing had<br \/>\nhappened  to cause sudden provocation which should be  grave<br \/>\nenough to make the appellant lose his balance of mind.\t But<br \/>\nin  that case an argument would be open to take the  offence<br \/>\nout  of\t the purview of ss. 300 and 302, I.P.C.\t That  point<br \/>\ndoes  not  appear to be open to the appellant  because\tthis<br \/>\nappeal\twas  not  admitted on the merits  and  we  are\tonly<br \/>\nrequired to consider whether on the conclusions of the\tHigh<br \/>\nCourt and on the assumption that the offence<br \/>\n(1)  A. 1. R. 1957 S. C. 469.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">848<\/span><\/p>\n<p>is  one of murder, lesser penalty should be imposed in\t*,he<br \/>\npresent\t case.\t Apart from the question  of  what  sentence<br \/>\nshould have been imposed by the trial court, in our opinion,<br \/>\nit is open to this Court under Art. 136 of the\tConstitution<br \/>\nto  see what sentence permissible under the law\t would\tmeet<br \/>\nthe ends of justice now when we are called upon to  consider<br \/>\nthat  question.\t  The  appellant was  clearly  on  terms  of<br \/>\nimproper intimacy with the deceased and was perhaps overcome<br \/>\nby  a sense of jealousy or indignation of&#8217; what\t he  thought<br \/>\nwas  unfaithfulness on the part of the\tdeceased.   Assuming<br \/>\nthe  trial  court  was justified  in  imposing\tthe  capital<br \/>\nsentence, the long lapse of time since the imposition of the<br \/>\ncapital sentence by the trial court and the consideration of<br \/>\nthe question of sentence by us, in our opinion,\t constitutes<br \/>\na  relevant  ground  for  reducing  the\t sentence  to\tlife<br \/>\nimprisonment.\tIn the present case the appellant must\thave<br \/>\nbeen in the condemned cell ever since October 30, 1971\twhen<br \/>\nthe sentence of death was imposed on him by the trial court.<br \/>\nThe High Court confirmed the sentence as far back is January<br \/>\n24,  1972.   Since  then  the  agonising  consciousness\t and<br \/>\nfeeling\t of  being  under the sentence of  death  must\thave<br \/>\nconstantly haunted the appellant.  No doubt, this delay\t has<br \/>\nbeen  caused because of the time taken by the High Court  in<br \/>\ndisposing  of  the application for leave to appeal  to\tthis<br \/>\nCourt  and  because of the pendency of the  application\t for<br \/>\nspecial\t leave to appeal in this Court since October,  1972.<br \/>\nBut that cannot detract from the acute mental agony to which<br \/>\nthe  appellant\tmust  have been\t subjected  ever  since\t the<br \/>\nimposition of the capital sentence on him.<br \/>\nWe  find that in July, 1972 this Court issued notice to\t the<br \/>\nrespondent State to show cause why special leave should\t not<br \/>\nbe  granted  in\t regard to the\tsentence.   The\t notice\t was<br \/>\napparently  issued  without any delay.\tBut the\t matter\t was<br \/>\nunfortunately  not set down for hearing till March 1,  1973.<br \/>\nThis delay was perhaps due to the fact that the\t respondent-<br \/>\nState  did not put in appearance.  Indeed, he State was\t not<br \/>\nrepresented  at\t the  hearing either of\t the  special  leave<br \/>\npetition or of the appeal before us.  Now the importance  of<br \/>\nspeedy\tdisposal  of cases involving sentence of  death\t has<br \/>\nbeen recognised by this Court, for, in r. 21(2) of O.XXI,,it<br \/>\nis expressly provided that in such cases the printed  record<br \/>\nshall  be made ready and despatched to this Court  within  a<br \/>\nperiod\tof 60 days after the receipt of intimation from\t the<br \/>\nregistry  of  this Court of the filing of  the\tpetition  of<br \/>\nappeal\tor  of the order granting special leave\t to  appeal.<br \/>\nThe same anxiety and concern for speedy disposal of  special<br \/>\nleave  petitions  in such cases is  equally  desirable.\t  It<br \/>\nappears\t that  the  importance\tof  speedy  hearing  of\t the<br \/>\npetition  for special leave was not realised in\t this  case.<br \/>\nIn  our view, the neglect or unwillingness of the  State  to<br \/>\nenter  appearance should not have prevented the\t posting  of<br \/>\nthe  special leave. petition for hearing with  the  greatest<br \/>\npossible dispatch.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">849<\/span><\/p>\n<p>On the facts and circumstances of this case we feel that the<br \/>\ninterests  of  justice require that the\t sentence  of  death<br \/>\nshould\tbe  reduced to that of life imprisonment and  we  so<br \/>\norder.\t The fact that the State of Andhra Pradesh  has\t not<br \/>\ncared  to enter appearance in spite of notice suggests\tthat<br \/>\nin the opinion of the legal advisors of the State there\t was<br \/>\nno good cause to show against the reduction of sentence.  In<br \/>\nPiare  Dusadh &amp; others v. Emperor(1) the sentence  of  death<br \/>\nwas  reduced  to  one of transportation for  life  when\t the<br \/>\nconvict\t had  inter alia been awaiting\texecution  of  death<br \/>\nsentence   for\tover  a\t year.\t The  Federal  Court   there<br \/>\nobserved:&#8212;\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t      &#8220;In committing the offence the appellant\tmust<br \/>\n\t      have   been   actuated  by  jealousy   or\t  by<br \/>\n\t      indignation either of which would tend further<br \/>\n\t      to  disturb the balance of his mind.   He\t has<br \/>\n\t      besides  been  awaiting the execution  of\t his<br \/>\n\t      death sentence for over a year.  We think that<br \/>\n\t      in this case a sentence of transportation\t for<br \/>\n\t      life  would  be  more  appropriate  than\t the<br \/>\n\t      sentence of death.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>These  observations  are equally pertinent to  the  case  in<br \/>\nhand.\n<\/p>\n<p>The  appeal  is\t accordingly  allowed  and  the\t appellant&#8217;s<br \/>\nsentence is reduced to that of imprisonment for life.\n<\/p>\n<pre>S.C.\t\t\t\t  Appeal allowed\n(1) A.I.R. 1944 F.C.I.\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">850<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Neti Sreeramulu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 2 April, 1973 Equivalent citations: 1973 AIR 2551, 1973 SCR (3) 844 Author: I Dua Bench: Dua, I.D. PETITIONER: NETI SREERAMULU Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH DATE OF JUDGMENT02\/04\/1973 BENCH: DUA, I.D. BENCH: DUA, I.D. MATHEW, KUTTYIL KURIEN CITATION: 1973 AIR 2551 [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-222997","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Neti Sreeramulu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 2 April, 1973 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Neti Sreeramulu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 2 April, 1973 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1973-04-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-07-08T18:43:18+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Neti Sreeramulu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 2 April, 1973\",\"datePublished\":\"1973-04-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-08T18:43:18+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973\"},\"wordCount\":2166,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973\",\"name\":\"Neti Sreeramulu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 2 April, 1973 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1973-04-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-08T18:43:18+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Neti Sreeramulu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 2 April, 1973\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Neti Sreeramulu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 2 April, 1973 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Neti Sreeramulu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 2 April, 1973 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1973-04-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-07-08T18:43:18+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Neti Sreeramulu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 2 April, 1973","datePublished":"1973-04-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-08T18:43:18+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973"},"wordCount":2166,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973","name":"Neti Sreeramulu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 2 April, 1973 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1973-04-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-08T18:43:18+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/neti-sreeramulu-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-2-april-1973#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Neti Sreeramulu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 2 April, 1973"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/222997","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=222997"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/222997\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=222997"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=222997"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=222997"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}