SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(SC) 681

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Doraiswamy Raju : H.K.Sema
Harijana Narayana And Another
Versus
State Of A.P.
Case No. : 889 of 2002
Date of Decision : 7/30/03
Advocates Appeared: Mahendra Anand : K.Sarada Devi : Guntur Prabhakar : T.Anamika

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, SectionS 302, 148 and 149 - Interested witness -Appellants convicted by trial court and appeai dismissed by the High Court- The plea appellants that the evidence of PWs were interested witnesses and that the independent witnesses, were deliberately withheld- Held there is no universal rule for rejection of the evidence of a witness merely because he/she was related to or interested in the parties on either side- Courts below considered every aspect meticulously- Order of conviction affirmed [Paras 6 to 8]

Doraiswamy Raju, J.

This appeal has been filed by the six appellants (Accused Nos. 1, 3 to 7) aggrieved against their conviction concurrently recorded by both the courts below for charges under Sections 148 and 302 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code (for short IPC), while holding them not guilty of the charge under Section 147, IPC for which three years R.I. under Section 148 and life imprisonment in addition to payment of fine with a default clause therefor for the other offence, came to be dismissed. Accused No.2 was said to have died during the pendency of the proceedings in the Trial Court itself and the proceedings held to have abated against him on 5.7.1996.

2. The substance of the prosecution case is that there were ill-feelings between the accused and the deceased since the year 1985 when the accused in the month of August 1985 seems to have lodged a complaint against the deceased - Papi Reddy and his son, Bhasker Reddy (PW4), on which a case in Crime No. 110/85 under Sections 452, 341, 365, 322 read with Section 149, IPC. and Section 7 (1) (d) of the PCR Act was registered. On 7.10.1987, the date of occurrence, about 9.15 a.m., the deceased and PW-4, his younger son, were said to have been waiting at Pragatoor Bus Stand to go to Alampur to meet their Advocate in connection with a case pending against them. The Road Transport Corporation Bus seems to have arrived at 9.30 a.m. and after the passengers got down, the deceased was about to board the Bus, when A-6 and A-7 seem to have pushed aside the deceased while A-1 to A-5 picked up Axes and Spears, which were paid to have been kept in the nearby Barber Shop. A-1 was alleged to have axed on the neck below the right ear of the deceased and A-3 axed on the right jaw, while A-2 axed on the neck of the deceased. A-4 and A-5 were said to have pierced with Spears on the right side of the abdomen. On hearing the hue and cry, PW-1 and PW4 were said to have rushed to the spot and found the deceased sinking. The body thereupon seems to have been shifted to the house of the deceased, nearby but the victim immediately thereafter died. PW1, one of the sons of the deceased, went to the Police Station and lodged a complaint with PW-10, who registered the same was Crime No. 103/87 against the accused under Sections 147 and 302 read with Section 149, IPC. A-1 to A-3 are said to be brothers and A-5 to A-7 are the brothers-in-law of A-1 to A-3. The remaining accused were said to be related to each other in one way or the other. PW-1 and PW-4 are the sons of the deceased, while PW-2 and PW-3 are said to be close associates of the deceased. Both the parties belonged to the same Village. They and their associates also seem to have been already involved in one or other criminal cases. The accused were said to have formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, armed with deadly weapons like Axes, Spears and Sticks, etc. with the common object to commit the murder of Papi Reddy when he arrived at the Bus Stand. The accused joined together and indiscriminately attacked the deceased causing severe injuries. During the course of investigation, PW-10 reached the house of the deceased and conducted in the presence of PW-6 and PW-7 inquest over the dead boy of the deceased and sent the same to the Government Hospital, Alampur, for post mortem examination where the Doctor (PW-9), who conducted the post mortem examination, gave his opinion (Ext. P.15) that the death was due to shock and haemorrhage on account of the multiple injuries sustained by the victim. He seized M.Os. 8 to 11 from the house of the deceased. Statements of PW-2 to PW-4 and one Mala Chinna Krishnaiah were said to have been also recorded. Ext. P.4 Panchnama of the scene of occurrence, was also said to have been made and M.Os. 1 and 2 as well as blood stained earth were seized from the place of occurrence. PW-11, Circle Inspector of Police, also joined the investigation and recorded statements of PW-5 and PW-11. Statements were









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top