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

2009 Supreme(AP) 236

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
A. GOPAL REDDY and K.C. BHANU, JJ.
Jelli Chinna Buchaiah - Appellant
Vs.
State of A.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No, 1303 of 2006
Decided on 6-4-2009

Advocates appeared:
Mr. G. Ramesh (Not Present) Counsel for the Appellant.
Smt. Vasantha Lakshmi Bavaraju. Amicus Curie for Applicant.
Public Prosecutor Counsel for the Respondent.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code - Section 302 – Quash of Proceeding - This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment, passed in S.C. No. 604 of 2005, by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Nalgonda, where under and whereby the sole accused was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 3021PC and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1001- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of on month – Held, the case squarely falls under Exception 4 of Section 300 I PC, but not under 302 IPC. Hence, the conviction and sentence recorded against the accused under Section 302 I PC is set aside. But we found the accused guilty of the offence under Section 304 Part-IIPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years. It is needless to observe that the remand period, if any, undergone by the accused during the course of investigation, trial and after conviction, shall be given set off under Section 428 Cr.P.C – Petition allowed

JUDGMENT (Per K.C. Bhanu, J.)

This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment dated 18-3-2006, passed in S.C. No. 604 of 2005, by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Nalgonda, where under and whereby the sole accused was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 3021PC and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1001- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of on month.

2. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the present criminal appeal may be stated as follows.

Devaiah (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') is no other than the son of the accused. P.W. 1 is the wife of the deceased. The deceased and P.W.1 along with their children used to reside at Hyderabad by doing coolie work. Two or three months prior to the death of the deceased, P.W.1 and the deceased came down to Vasanthapuram and living with the accused in his house. The accused was having half acre of agricultural land in their village. After the deceased returned to the village he asked his father to give the half acre of land to him for cultivating the same on lease, for which the accused refused to give the same as he proposed to give the land to a person belonging to Lambada caste. Still the deceased insisted the accused to give the land to him on payment of lease amount. On that a quarrel ensued between then. On 14-4-2005 at about 8 p.m., the accused kept the mat at some other place. The deceased asked the accused to give the mat for sleeping. On that again there was some scuffle between them. In that scuffle, the deceased beat the accused. Thereafter, P.W. 1, the deceased and their children went to bed. At about 11 p.m. P.W.1 woke up to attend calls of nature and found the accused smoking beedi in front of the house. She went to some distance. But due to suspicion against the accused, she saw towards her house and saw the accused picking up a knife and entering into the house and stabbing the deceased. Then she raised cries. Upon hearing the cries, the neighbours rushed to the place of incident. Then P.W.1 along with neighbours lifted the deceased in an auto to Ananthagiri road to go to Kodada hospital for treatment. By the time they reached Ananthagiri road, the deceased died and they brought back the dead body to house. Thereafter P.W.1 went to Nadigudem Police Station and lodged Ex. P-1 complaint with the police. P.W. 11 registered the complaint as a case in Crime No. 28 of 2005 for the offence punishable under Section 3021 PC and informed to P.W. 12-Circle Inspector of Polcie, who took up investigation. He rushed to the scene of occurrence, conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of P.W. 8 and others. He also observed the scene of occurrence in the presence of same mediators, prepared rough sketch of the scene of occurrence and examined the witnesses. Thereafter, he subjected the dead body for postmortem examination. During the course of investigation, he arrested the accused on 19-4-2005 at 10.30 a.m. at the outskirts of Vasanthapuram village. On the confessional statement made by the accused the police seized M.O. 1-knife from the help of mango leaves in the mango garden. He also seized the clothes of the accused under M.Os. 4 and 5, and sent the material objects to Forensic Science Laboratory. The Doctor, who conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased, gave his opinion stating that the deceased died as a result of injury to liver caused by a sharp edged weapon. After completion of investigation and after receiving the relevant reports, P.W. 12 filed the charge sheet.

3. The charge framed against the accused is that on 14-4-2005 at about 11.00 p.m. at Vasanthapuram village, he did commit the murder of Jelli Devaiah, who is his own son, intentionally causing his death by stabbing him with a knife on his right side of stomach under the ribs, on the ground that on the same day night the deceased beat him when he refused to give his half acre la
































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