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

2005 Supreme(AP) 631

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Itikala Srinu - Appellant
Versus
State OF A.P. - Respondent
Decided On : 07-15-05

Headnote:

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 374 (2) –Indian Penal Code – Sections 302, 34 – Evidence Act – Section 32 (1) –Criminal Conviction of Murder, Witness –Learned Counsel for the appellant accused no. 2 contended that the evidence of PWs. 1 to 3 is highly interested and discrepant; that they are closely related to the deceased and therefore no reliance can be placed upon their evidence and that there are no direct witnesses to the incident and the entire case rests on circumstantial evidence and those circumstances do not connect the appellant with the crime; that there is no possibility or scope for the prosecution witnesses to identify the accused because the incident is alleged to have been taken place in the darkness; that there is no evidence to show that the appellant was in possession of the deadly weapon and as such no weapon was seized at the instance of A-2; that there is no evidence on record to show that the deceased was in a talking condition so as to narrate the incident and the names of the assailants –Therefore, the learned Counsel prays to acquit the appellant-accused –Held, It is vehemently contended by the learned Counsel for the appellant that since a-2 was not found in possession of any sort of weapon and as no weapon was seized at the instance of A-2- appellant convicting him cannot be sustainable –Court is not able to accept the same because Section 34 lays down a principle of joint liability in the doing of a criminal act –Since the oral dying declaration is clear and convincing that it is both the accused 1 and 2 who caused injuries, the common intention can be inferred from the circumstances in view of the fact that the incident took place at the house of the deceased and there is no other reason for A-2 going to the house of the deceased at an odd hour – Considering all these aspects, the learned Sessions Judge rightly found A-2 guilty of the offence and the said findings cannot be said to be perverse or contrary to the evidence on record –Appeal dismissed

K. C. BHANU, J, J.

( 1 ) THE 2nd accused in S. C. No. 999 of 2000 on the file of Special judge for SC/st cases, Warangal preferred the present appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the conviction under Section 302 ipc read with 34 IPC and sentence of imprisonment for life.

( 2 ) THE brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of this case are as follows:

( 3 ) THE police originally filed chargesheet against three accused. A-1 died during the pendency of the case, whereas A-3 was acquitted by the trial Court. Two years prior to the date of death of the deceased, a-1 returned to Ankushapuram and purchased sheep and was eking out his livelihood. The mother of A-1 was mentally retarded. During the Dasara Festival of 1999, the condition of the mother of A-1 became serious. Therefore she was taken by A-1 to Kotancha Temple thinking that she will be cured. During that period, half of the sheep which A-1 was owning died on account of disease. The sheep of others also died on account of disease. A-1 suspected that the sheep died and the condition of his mother became very serious on account of practicing sorcery by the deceased. Therefore A-1 used to threaten the deceased to kill. On the date of incident, the deceased Mothe Narsaiah went to sleep during night time in the cattle shed which is at a distance of 4 to 5 yards opposite to the house of PW-1, who is no other than the son of the deceased. PW-1 and his family members were sleeping inside their house. The deceased was sleeping alone in the cattle shed. At about 11. 45 p. m. on the night of 17. 8. 2000 PW-1 heard the cries of the deceased. Then PW-1, pw-2 who is the wife of the deceased and pw-3 who is the son of PW-1 came out of the house and saw A-1 and A-2 coming out of the shed where the deceased was sleeping. A-1 was holding a knife. The witnesses identified the accused -with the help of electric light which was in front of their house. When they entered the shed, they found the deceased leaning to the wooden pole with bleeding injuries on the body. When they questioned as to who stabbed him, the deceased informed them that A-1 and A-2 stabbed him. They also found A-3 standing on the road near the hut. On the next day morning at about 10. 00 a. m. PW-1 went to the Police Station and lodged a report. The S. I. of Police registered a case in Cr. No. 60 of 2000 for the offence under Section 302 read with 34 ipc on 18. 8. 2000 and sent F. I. Rs. to all the concerned. PW-11 took up investigation and proceeded to the scene of occurrence which was located in the cattle shed in front of the house of PW-1. Then he held inquest on the dead body from 11. 30 a. m. to 1. 30 p. m. in the presence of PW-7 and another. During the inquest the bloodstained earth and control earth were seized. The inquest mediators opined that the deceased died due to stab injuries. Thereafter the dead body was sent to post-mortem examination. PW-10 is the doctor who conducted autopsy on the dead body and opined that the deceased died on account of shock and haemorrhage due to multiple injuries. The Inspector of Police also examined the scene of occurrence in the presence of PW-5 and another and seized the incriminating material. He also prepared the rough sketch of the scene of occurrence and photographed the same through PW-7. PW-9 examined the witnesses. On 21. 8. 2000 the Asst. S. I. of Police arrested the accused at Ankushapuram and produced before PW-11 who interrogated them. A-1 offered to show the knife and the towel used in the commission of offence. In pursuance of the confessional statement of A-1 he led the police and the mediators to his house and produced M. Os. 6 and 7 -knife and towel - used in the commission of offence. The incriminating material was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory and after receipt of report from the F. S. L. , the Inspector of Police filed chargesheet against the three accused before the judicial First Class Magistrate, Par















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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