In a case that once gripped the nation and sparked intense media debate, the Supreme Court has brought the curtain down on the tragic death of young actress Pratyusha. Nearly two decades after the incident, the Court set aside the conviction of Gudipalli Siddhartha Reddy for abetment of suicide, holding that the evidence on record did not prove that he had instigated or aided her death.
The judgment came in Criminal Appeal No. 457 of 2012, along with connected appeals.
Read also:- Gujarat HC Clears Way for Police Recruit, Says Minor, Quashed FIR Can’t Block Appointment
Background of the Case
Pratyusha, a 20-year-old actress, and Siddhartha Reddy were in a relationship and wanted to marry. While her mother had eventually agreed, Reddy’s family reportedly opposed the match. On 23 February 2002, both were admitted to Care Hospital in Hyderabad after consuming poison. Pratyusha died the next day; Reddy survived.
An FIR was initially registered under Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The postmortem report prepared by Dr. B. Muni Swamy claimed death due to “manual strangulation” and suggested possible sexual assault. However, forensic reports from the Andhra Pradesh Forensic Science Laboratory and later the Central Forensic Science Laboratory detected organophosphate poison in the viscera.
A government-appointed expert committee and later a medical board from AIIMS concluded that the injuries noted in the postmortem were caused by medical treatment procedures, not violence. They opined that the cause of death was organophosphate poisoning and found no evidence of sexual assault.
Read also:- Madras High Court Orders Removal of Shops from Kanyakumari Temple Mandapam, Slams HR&CE
The CBI, which took over the probe following public interest litigation, eventually filed a chargesheet under Sections 306 (abetment of suicide) and 309 (attempt to commit suicide) of the Indian Penal Code.
The trial court convicted Reddy under both sections. The High Court later reduced his sentence under Section 306 to two years but upheld the conviction.
Court’s Observations
The Supreme Court examined the medical records, forensic reports, and the sequence of events in detail. It noted that multiple expert bodies had ruled out strangulation and sexual assault. The cause of death was consistently held to be organophosphate poisoning.
On the charge of abetment, the Court emphasized that mere presence or a relationship between two individuals is not enough to establish criminal liability. “To constitute abetment of suicide, there must be clear evidence of instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid,” the bench observed.
The Court found no material to show that Reddy had provoked or compelled Pratyusha to take the extreme step. The prosecution theory that the couple had jointly consumed poison in an impulsive act did not, by itself, establish that Reddy abetted her suicide.
The judges also noted that there was no evidence of prior planning or coercion. The incident appeared to be the result of emotional turmoil arising from family opposition to their marriage.
Importantly, the Court underscored that criminal law requires proof beyond reasonable doubt. Suspicion, however strong, cannot replace legal proof.
The Decision
Allowing the appeals, the Supreme Court set aside the conviction of Gudipalli Siddhartha Reddy under Section 306 IPC. Since he had already undergone the sentence imposed under Section 309 IPC, no further orders were required on that count.
The Court held that the essential ingredients of abetment were not made out and that the prosecution had failed to establish intentional instigation or active participation in the suicide.
With this, the long-running criminal proceedings came to an end.
Case Title: Gudipalli Siddhartha Reddy v. State (CBI)
Case No.: Criminal Appeal No. 457 of 2012 (with Criminal Appeal Nos. 894–895 of 2012)
Decision Date: February 18, 2026
