Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1991 Supreme(SC) 403

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.M. AHMADI AND M.M. PUNCHHI, JJ.
State of A.P., Appellant

Versus

Dr. M. V. Ramana Reddy and others, Respondents.
Criminal Appeal No.7 of 1979

Decided on 14-8-1991.
Advocates appeared
Mr. K. Madhava Reddy, Sr. Advocate, Mr. T. V. S. N. Char, Mr. Narasimha P. V. P. L. and Ms. M. Gupta Advocate with him for Appellant; Mr. R. K. Garg, Sr. Advocate, Mr. T. Rama Mohan Raj, Mr. N. M. Popli and Mr. V. J. Francis, Advocates with him, for Respondents.

Advocates:
K.Madhava Reddy, M.S.Gupta, N.M.POPLI, P.S.NARASIMHA, R.K.GARG, T.RAMA MOHAN RAJU, T.V.S.N.Chari, V.J.Francis

IMPORTANT POINTIn the absence of valid explanation for delay in holding of Identification Parade possibility of accused in custody having been already shown to identifier cannot be ruled out.

Headnote:(i) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302 and 149 - Murder by unlawful assembly Accused 1, 3 & 5 convicted by Trial Court Acquitted by High Court - Murder of deceased on terrace of his residential house - Political rivalry - P.W.1 incident witnessed by daughter of deceased - High Court disbelieving her testimony - Presence of P.W.1 corroborated by others - P.W.1 actually knowing Accused 1 She was also injured in incident - High Courts finding that injuries are self inflicted Whether correct? (No) (Para 20) - Delay in sending F.I.R. to Magistrate of no significance as F.I.R. not admitted in evidence. (Para 21)
       Held - Once it is accepted that P.W.1 had slept on the terrace and had sustained the injuries in the incident, her evidence regarding the identity of accused No.1 who was quite well known to her cannot be doubted. We are, therefore, of the view that the High Court was not justified in disturbing the view taken by the trial Court in this behalf. (Para 21)
       Further held - This appeal is partly allowed insofar as it relates to original accused No.1 i.e., respondent No.1 before us. The High Courts order acquitting him is set aside. (Para 23)
       (ii) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302 and 149 - Murder by unlawful assembly Accused 3 & 5 convicted by Trial Court but acquitted by High Court - Appeal by special leave against acquittal- Names of Accused not found in report to police - Accused 3 & 5 strangers to P.W.1- Identified in Parade - Parade held late - Delay not explained - Benefit of delay given to accused 3 & 5 by High Court Whether proper? (Yes)
       Held - There is no valid explanation tendered by the prosecution for the delay in holding the identification parades. The defence has suggested in the cross-examination of P.W.1 and P.W.25 that in the meantime the accused who were in custody were shown to the witnesses and the police had secured a group photograph in which accused Nos. 3 and 5 figured to facilitate their identification. The High Court was, however, reluctant to place absolute reliance on the evidence of P.W.1 regarding the identity of accused Nos. 3 and 5. In the absence of a valid explanation for the delay we do not think that this approach of the High Court can be said to be manifestly wrong to call for our intervention. (Para 22)

JUDGMENT

AHMADI, J.:—Ram Subba Reddy,an advocate, politician (an ex-MLA)-cum-trade unionist was done to death when he was sleeping on the terrace of his house in Proddatur, District Cuddapah, on the night between 14th and 15th April 1975. The incident in question occurred at about 3.30 a.m. in which, apart from the deceased Ram Subba Reddy having received fatal blows by lethal weapons, his daughter P. W. 1 Krishnaveni, aged about 24 years, received injuries., when she attempted to go to help her father. As many as 19 persons were put up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Cuddapah on different charges. Original accused Nos. 1 and 7 to 19 were charged for criminal conspiracy under S. 120B; original accused Nos. 1 to 6, 12 and 13 were charged for rioting with deadly weapons under S. 148; original accused No. 16 was charged under S. 147 along with original accused Nos 1 to 6, 12 and 13; original accused Nos. 1 to 6 and 12 and 13 were charged for murder under S. 302; the said accused along with original accused No. 16 were also charged under S. 302/149; original accused No. 5 was charged under S. 324 and he as well as original accused Nos. 1 to 4, 6, 12, 13 and 16 were charged under S. 324/149, I.P.C. To bring home the charges against them the prosecution mainly relied on the testimony of P.W. 1 Krishnaveni, P.W. 2 Venkata Subbamma, widow of the deceased, P.W. 3, Venkat Rami Reddy and P. W. 4 Kasi reddy Sambasiva Reddy, both of whom it is claimed were sleeping on the ground floor of the house of the deceased and P.W. 5 Annapu Reddy Venkata Subba Reddy, a neighbour who arrived at the scene of incident on hearing the commotion and who at the instance of P.W. 1 lodged the FIR Exh. P-56 at about 4.30 a.m. The learned Additional Sessions Judge accepted the evidence of P.Ws. 1, 2, 3 and 5, P.W. 4 having turned hostile, and convicted original accused Nos. 1 and 3 under S. 148 and Ss. 302 and 324 with the aid of S. 149, I.P.C. and original accused No. 5 under Ss. 148, 302 and 324, I.P.C., substantially. All the three of them were sentenced to life imprisonment for murdering Ram Subba Reddy and to rigorous imprisonment for 13 years under Ss. 148, I.P.C. No separate was imposed for causing injuries to P.W. 1. The rest were acquitted of all the charges levelled against them. No appeal was preferred to, the High Court against their acquittal but the three convicted accused preferred an appeal to the High Court challenging their conviction while the State appealed for enhancement of the sentence of accused No. 1 from life imprisonment to.capital punishment. The High Court doubted the testimony of P. Ws. 1, 2, 3 and 5 and their capacity to identify the assailants and, therefore, acquitted them of all the charges levelled against them. Consequently the States appeal for enhancement of accused Nos. 1s sentence also failed. While the State has preferred this appeal against the order of acquittal of original accused Nos. 1, 3 and 5, no appeal has been preferred against the dismissal of.the States appeal for enhancement of the accused No. 1s sentence, A few facts leading to this appeal may be noticed.

2. The deceased was a practising lawyer and a congressman. He was a member of the Legislative Assembly during the 1967-72 term. He had his own house in which he resided., Accused No. 1, a medical practitioner, was a trade union activist belonging to the Communist Party of India (Marxist Leninist group) and weilded considerable influence among the working classes. Accused No. 2 was a lower Division clerk in the judicial department, District Cuddapah, but was on leave at the material time. He was a close associate of accused No. 1. Accused Nos. 3 and 5 were employees of Andhra Cotton Mills, Proddatur, while accused Nos. 4 and 6 were employees of International Packaging Company, Proddatur, and took part in -trade union activities. In the first quarter of 1974 the workers of the International Packaging Company had served the management w

Click Here to Read the rest of this document