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

2010 Supreme(AP) 181

High Court of Andhra Pradesh
GHULAM MOHAMMED & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD
Yeddula Suryanarayana Reddy
Versus
State of A.P.
Crl. Appeals Nos.1616 of 2008, 1603 of 2008, 1502 of 2008, 54 of 2010 and Crl.RC No.83 of 2010
Decided on: 09-03-2010

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appearing Parties:C. Padmanabha Reddy, Mohd Osman Shaheed, Advocates.

Headnote:

Indian Panel Code - Sections 120-B, 148 and 302 – Offence of Murder – Conspiracy - It is relevant to mention here itself that A-5 and A-9 who were also charged along with accused had died before trial - Substance charge against accused was that all accused conspired to commit murder of deceased and in furtherance said conspiracy committed murder of deceased by hacking him with hunting sickles indiscriminately all over his body resulting in his death way to Government Hospital - Plea accused is one of denial and they claimed to be tried - Held, contention counsel for the appellant criminal revision case that accused liable for punishment Section 120-B IPC also cannot be sustained - As rightly observed Sessions Court, PW-10 examined to prove conspiracy and meeting it has come in his evidence that he did not inform any one about conspiracy hatched by accused which according him was planned one week prior date offence - In his cross examination he stated that he has not seen whether A-1 to A-4 were present along with A-8 and A-9 when conspiracy to kill deceased was hatched - Appeal dismissed

Judgment :-

Ghulam Mohammed, J.

(1) All these criminal appeals and the criminal revision case are filed against the judgment in SC No.378 of 1998, dated 28-11-2008 passed by the VI Addl. Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court), Anantapur at Gooty.

(2) The Accused A-1 to A-4, A.6 to A-8, A-10 and A-11 were charged for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 148 and 302 IPC. It is relevant to mention here itself that A-5 and A-9 who were also charged along with the accused had died before the trial. Substance of the charge against the accused was that all the accused conspired to commit murder of deceased Shiva Prasad Reddy and in furtherance of the said conspiracy committed murder of deceased Shiva Prasad Reddy by hacking him with hunting sickles indiscriminately all over his body resulting in his death on the way to Government Hospital, Gooty. The plea of the accused is one of denial and they claimed to be tried. In order to connect the accused with the crime and bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined 12 witnesses, PWs.1 to 12, marked documents Exs.P-1 to P-15 and produced Nos.1 to 16. The accused examined D Ws.1 to 4 as defence witnesses and marked documents Exs.D-1 to D-10.

(3) The Sessions Court, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the parties, by the judgment impugned in these cases, held that A-1 to A-4, A-6, A-7, A-8, A-10 and A-11 were not guilty of the offence punishable under Section 120-B IPC and accordingly acquitted them of the said charge. It was also found that A-6, A-7 and A-8 were not guilty of the offences punishable under Section 302 IPC accordingly they were acquitted of the charge. However, the Sessions Court found A-1 to A-4, A-10 and A-11 guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 148 IPC and 302 IPC and accordingly convicted and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life.

(4) Assailing the said conviction and sentence recorded by the Sessions Court, Crl. Appeal No.1616 of 2008 is filed by Accused Nos.1 to 4, Crl. Appeal No.1603 of 2008 is filed by Accused No.10, Crl. Appeal No. 1502 of 2008 is filed by Accused No.11. Crl. Appeal No.54 of 2010 is filed by the State against the acquittal of Accused Nos.6 to 8 of the offence under Section 302 IPC and also against the acquittal of the Accused Nos.1 to 4, 6 to 8, and 10 and 11 of the of fence under Section 120-B IPC Mr. Y.Sharabha Reddy, (PW-1) filed Crl.RC No.83 of 2010 against the acquittal of Accused Nos.6 to 8 of the offence under Section 302 IPC and also against the acquittal of the Accused Nos. 1 to 4, 6 to 8, and 10 and 11 of the offence under Section 120-B IPC. It is relevant to note while investigation was in progress a petition was filed by A-10 and A-11 by taking the plea of alibi.

(5) Thus the charge sheet was filed only against accused A-1 to A-9. The case was taken on file against A-1 to A-9 as PRC No.47 of 1997 by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Gooty. The case was committed to the Court of Session, Anantapur and numbered as SC No.378 of 1998 against A-1 to A-9. After the chief examination of PW1, the Public Prosecutor filed Crl.MPNo.136 of 2004 under Section 319 Cr.PC to add A10 and A-11 as accused in the case. The said petition was dismissed by the Sessions

Court and confirmed by this High Court. However, the matter was carried to the Hon'ble Supreme Court and as per the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Crl.A.No.689 of 2007, dated 10-5-2007, A-10 and A-11 were added as accused along with A-1 to A-9.

(6) Before dealing with the contentions urged in these appeals, the case of the prosecution may briefly be stated as follows:-

(7) Yeddula Sarabha Reddy (PW-1), Yeddula Suryaprabhakar Reddy (LW-2) and Yeddula Siva Prasad Reddy (short, 'the deceased') are brothers. Deceased Siva Prasad a Reddy was practising advocate at Gooty. PW-1 and LW-2 Yeddula Suryaprabhakar Reddy are agriculturists. The deceased-Siva Prasad Reddy along with his brothers was residing in Peddavaduguru










































































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
whatsapp-icon Back to top