Point of Law: Conviction set aside - Prosecution failed to prove the circumstances relied upon by them to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT :

C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, J.

1. A1 and A2 in Sessions Case No. 167 of 2012 on the file of the X Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirupati, are the appellants herein.

2. They were tried for the offences punishable under Sections 302 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.) or in alternative under Sections 302 I.P.C. 201 r/w 34 I.P.C. and 392 I.P.C.

3. Vide judgment dated 02.05.2015, the learned Sessions Judge convicted both the accused under Section 302 r/w 34 I.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month each. They were also convicted under Section 201 r/w 34 I.P.C. and each one of them was sentenced to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of three years and also pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month each. Both the appellants were also found guilty under Section 392 I.P.C. and sentenced to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of three years and pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month each. All the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently. The remand period undergone by both the accused was directed be given set off.

4. The facts, as culled out from the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, are as under:

PW-1 is the son and PW-2 is the husband of the deceased. PW-3 and PW-4 were examined as eye witnesses to the incident, while PW-5 is the resident of the said village, who knows the appellants and the deceased.

It is stated that on 09.06.2010, One Albert, who is arrayed as A1, called PW-1 on phone and requested him to send food with his mother i.e. the deceased, to the temple of Eswara, near Satyavedu as he will be going there along with Munaswamy (A2), Rekha (PW-4), Muniamma and Mariamma (PW-3), to have Darshan in the said temple.

On 11.06.2010, PW-1 went to work in the morning and his mother (deceased) took food to the temple as requested by the appellants. He came back from work at 8.00 p.m. by bus and alighted at Satyavedu, where he found his mother along with A1, A2, PW-3 and PW4 along with Muniamma. When PW-1 asked his mother to accompany him to the house, she replied stating that she would serve food to A1 and others and then come home on the next day morning after-having Darshan. As such, PW-1 went home.

On the next day morning i.e. early hours of 12.06.2010, A2 came to the house of PW-1 and informed him that the deceased was killed by somebody after removing her clothes. According to him, the dead-body was lying near Kings School, Satyavedu. He also asked him to bring clothes to cover the body. Then PW-1 questioned him as to how this could be happened, when he left his mother in his company, to which A2 replied that the deceased left with an unknown person stating that she will bring water in two liters bottle from the house of Settivaru.

On coming to know about the said incident, he along with his father, sister and other villagers went to the scene of offence and noticed the dead-body lying without clothes. He also noticed ear studs, nose stud missing from the body. They found Thali of the deceased was lying on the ground but Thali bottu was missing.

Suspecting some foul play, PW-1 lodged a report with PW-11, the Sub-Inspector of Police, who registered it as a case in Crime No. 32 of 2010 under Section 302 I.P.C. and issued Ex.P6, FIR. Further investigation in this case was taken up by PW-12, the Inspector of Police, Sathyavedu. According to him, on receipt of express FIR in Crime No. 32 of 2010, which was registered under Section 302 I.P.C. he proceeded to the scene of offence along with his staff and prepared rough sketch of the scene, which is placed on record as Ex.P7. He also prepared an observation report of the scene in the presence of panch witnesses. He examined PWs. 1 to 5 and recorded their statements.

He conducted inquest over the dead-body at 11.00 a.m. During inquest, he seized o