( 1 ) THE State preferred this appeal, aggrieved by the judgment, dated 24-1-2001 in S. C. No. 15/1996 on the file of the II Additional sessions Judge, Eluru, whereby the accused- respondents were acquitted of the charges levelled against them.

( 2 ) THE facts that are necessary for the disposal of the appeal are briefly stated as follows. The accused persons belong to yenuguvanilanka village. A-l and A-3 are sons of A-4. A-2, A-5 and A-6 are sons of eldest brother of A-4. There is a "maremma and Muvalamma" temple in the village. There is also a "rama" temple in the village. There were some disputesbetween the family of accused persons and of Devarapu Srinivas @ Sreenu, the deceased in this case, in connection with the performance of the functions in the temples. A festival wasbeing celebrated on 4-5-1995 and 5-5-1995 in the temple of "maremma and Muvalamma". In the midnight, the accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons. A-3 caught hold of the deceased and dragged him to the "rama" temple. P. W. 1 saw this and questioned A-3 as to why he was doing so. Then A-2 beat him with a stick on his left elbow joint and left shoulder. A-l pocked the deceased with a crowbar underneath his left armpit and beat with the crowbar on his forehead. The deceased then cried. P. W. 1 too raised cries. On hearing the cries, P. W. 2 rushed to the spot. A-3 and A-5 beat P. W. 2 with sticks on his forehead. P. W. 3 then reached the scene of occurrence. A-4 beat him with a stick. P. W. 4 also went to the spot. He too was beaten on his head. The deceased died on the spot When the other villagers started reaching the scene of occurrence, the accused ran away. Police were informed about the incident. They reached the village at about 3. 30 a. m. on 5-5-1995. P. W. 1 made an oral complaint with the police, which was reduced into writing an marked as Ex. P-1 on the basis of which a case was registered and investigated into. P. W. 22 took up investigation. He recorded the statements of witnesses, observed the scene of occurrence and seized bloodstained clothes and earth. He sent the injured witnesses, P. Ws. 1 to 5, for treatment. P. W. 17 treated them. P. W. 22 held inquest over the dead body of the deceased and later sent it for conducting post-mortem examination. P. W. 16 conducted post- mortem examination. He opined that the deceased died due to the injuries. On completion of investigation, P. W. 22 laid a charge-sheet. Eight charges were framed against the accused - firstly against A-l to a-6 under Section 148 IPC, secondly against a-l under Section 302, thirdly against A-2 to a-6 under Section 302 read with Section 149 ipc, fourthly against A-2 under Section 324 ipc for voluntarily causing hurt to P. W. 1, fifthly against A-5 under Section 324 IPC for voluntarily causing hurt to P. W. 2, sixthly against A-4 under Section 326 IPC for causing grievous hurt to P. W. 3, seventhly against a-6 under Section 324 IPC for voluntarily causing hurt to P. W. 4, and lastly against a-l to A-6 under Section 324 IPC for voluntarily causing hurt to P. W. 5. The accused denied their guilt. On its behalf, prosecution examined 22 witnesses and marked 26 documents, besides M. Os. 1 to 6. The defence marked Exs. D-1 to D-9. On assessment of the evidence on record, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond all reasonable doubt and accordingly by the impugned judgment acquitted all the accused of all the charges, challenging the legality and correctness whereof the State preferred the present appeal.

( 3 ) HEARD the learned Public Prosecutor as well as the learned counsel for the accused- respondents.

( 4 ) P. W. 22-Inspector of Police-conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of P. W. 14. Ex. P-6 is the inquest report. The inquest mediators opined that the death of the deceased was the result of the injuries received by him. P. W. 16 conducted p