IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
A.V. RAVINDRA BABU, J.
Thupakula Venkata Reddy – Petitioner
Versus
The Stae Of A.P., rep by PP.A, and Others - Respondents
Criminal Revision Case No.1793 Of 2008
Decided On : 17-03-2023
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 147, 148, 324, 326, 149 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 248(1) - Appeal against acquittal - - Held, As seen from judgment of learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Kadapa, he analysed evidence of injured witnesses and found that there were material omissions and contradictions - It is apparent from evidence available that A.7 and A.9 also received injuries on date of incident at time of offence which prosecution failed to explain - It cannot be held that judgment of learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Kadapa, is perverse -Having considered entire evidence on record, learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Kadapa, did not believe case of prosecution - Having regard to above, Court of considered view that absolutely there are no grounds to interfere with judgment of learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Kadapa - Hence, Court see no reason to remand matter to trial Court - Criminal Revision dismissed.
ORDER :
1. This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the Prosecution Witness No.1/defacto-complainant in C.C.No.1 of 2004, on the file of I Additional Sessions Judge, Kadapa (Originally it was on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Pulivendula), challenging the judgment, dated 28.07.2008, where under the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Kadapa, found the accused (A.1 to A.14) not guilty of the charges framed against them and acquitted them under Section 248(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (“Cr.P.C.” for short).
2. The parties to this Criminal Revision Case will hereinafter be referred to as described before the trial Court for the sake of the convenience.
3. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Vempalli Police Station, filed charge sheet in Crime No.38 of 2003 under Sections 147, 148, 324, 326 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code (“I.P.C.” for short), alleging as follows:
(ii) On 06.07.2003 at 6-00 p.m., A.7 was distributing kerosene quota in Muthukur village. Both L.W.1 and L.W.2 went to the house of A.7 and asked him as to why he is distributing last month quota. Then, A.2 who is the son of A.7 challenged that he can do whatever he likes. Then, A.7 and A.4 armed with crowbars and A.2, A.3, A.5 and A.13 armed with stones, formed themselves into unlawful assembly and came upon L.W.1 and L.W.2. L.W.1 and L.W.2 ran into the house of L.W.6-Kummari Kondaiah due to fear. All the accused rushed into the house of L.W.6. Then, A.3, A.2 and A.5 beat L.W.1 with stones and caused bleeding injuries to his right leg, neck and right hand. When L.W.2 intervened, A.7 beat L.W.2 with a crowbar on his right hand and caused bleeding injury. A.4 beat L.W.2 with a crowbar on his right leg thrice. A.6 beat L.W.2 with a stone on his head and caused bleeding injury. When, L.W.3-Peram Chinna Chennareddy, L.W.4-Chanda Ramulamma and L.W.5-Chanda Venkata Subba Reddy intervened, A.1 beat L.W.3 with a stone on his head and A.8 and A.9 beat L.W.3 with sticks and caused injuries. A.10 and A.11 beat L.W.4 with stones and caused injuries on her head and cheeks. A.12 beat L.W.5 with a stone on his head. A.13 and A.14 beat L.W.5 with sticks and caused injuries. Thereafter, L.W.1 and L.W.2 went to Pulivendala and L.W.2 got admitted in Government Hospital. L.W.7-Badraiah, Head Constable 435, recorded the statement of L.W.1 in the hospital and sent to Vempalli Police Station on the point of jurisdiction.
(iii) The Sub-Inspector of Police, Vempalli Police Station, registered it as a case in Crime No.38 of 2003 under Section 147, 148, 324, 326 r/w 149 of I.P.C. and investigated into. L.W.9- Medical Officer, examined the injured and opined that the injuries sustained by them are simple and grievous in nature. Hence, the charge sheet.
4. The learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Pulivendula, took the case on file for the offences under Sections 148, 324, 326 r/w 34 of I.P.C. and issued summons to the accused. On their appearance and on complying Section 207 of Cr.P.C., charge under Section 148 of I.P.C. against A.1 to A.14, charge under Section 324 of I.P.C. against A.2, A.3 and A.5, charge under Section 324 r/w 149 of I.P.C. against A.1, A.4, A.6 to A.14, charge under Section 326 of I.P.C. against A.4, A.6 and A.7, charge under Section 326 r/w 149 of I.P.C. against A.1 to A.3, A.5, A.8 to A.14, charge under Section 324 of I.P.C. against A.1, A.8 and A.9, charge under Section 324 r/w 149 of I.P.C. against A.2 to A.7, A.10 to A.14, charge under Section 324 of I.P.C. against A.10 and A.11, charge under Section 324 r/w 149 of I.P.C. against A.1 to A.9, A.12 to A.14, charge under Section 324 of I.P.C. against A.12, A.13 and
The importance of explaining injuries on the accused and the impact of unexplained injuries on the prosecution's case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on consistent witness testimony, medical evidence, and lack of glaring inconsistency between ocular and medical evidence to determine ....
The judgment underscores the principle that an acquittal should not be overturned without compelling evidence, emphasizing the importance of consistent and reliable witness testimonies in criminal ca....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on credible testimony of prosecution witnesses and medical evidence to establish guilt, and the non-fatal nature of non-seizure of the....
Point of Law : Section 134 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 made it clear the number of witnesses are not criteria, but quality of evidence and not quantity of evidence. Further, it is made clear that me....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.