IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI, JJ.
The State Of A.P., rep by PP., - Petitioner
Versus
Bontha Rahelu And Others. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No.401 of 2013 and Criminal Revision Case No.1310 of 2008
Decided On : 06-01-2023
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 302 read with 34 - Offence of Murder - Evidence of prosecution witnesses - Cross Examination - Whether prosecution has proved guilty of accused for offence punishable - Held, Who also claims to have seen incident categorically admits in his cross examination that by time he reached scene deceased was on ground with number of people around him - One another which requires to be noted here is that also claims to have given a report to police which has not seen light of day - Coming to evidence of she also claims to be a direct witness to incident - In her cross examination she admits that by time she went to scene of offence deceased was down on ground with persons numbering about standing around deceased - She also admits that one cannot see what happened at house of from her house - Projecting as an eye witness to incident also in court view is not established by any reliable evidence Appeal Dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
(C. Praveen Kumar, J.)
1. The present Criminal Appeal and the Criminal Revision Case are filed assailing the judgment, dated 03.06.2008, in Sessions Case No.684 of 2005 on the file of the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur.
2. Originally, A-1 was tried for the offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. and A-2 to A-13 were tried for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 I.P.C. for causing the death of one Bontha Abraham (hereinafter, referred to as “the deceased”) on 18.07.2005 at about 7.00 p.m. near four road junction, Audi Andhra Colony, Chilakaluripet.
3. Vide judgment, dated 03.06.2008, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted all the accused. Challenging the same, the State preferred Criminal Appeal No.401 of 2013 and the father of the deceased filed Criminal Revision Case No.1310 of 2008.
4. The facts, as disclosed in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, show that all the accused and the prosecution witnesses are residents of Audi Andhra Colony, Chilakaluripet. The deceased is the son of P.W.1. He was running a provisions shop in their colony. The distance between the house of P.W.1 and the kirana shop was about 100 feet and there are four houses in between the said house and the kirana shop. It is said that A-1 and A-2 purchased provisions from the shop of the deceased on credit basis. Whenever the deceased used to ask for money, A-1 and A-2 used to pick up a quarrel with him. About two years prior to the incident, on one day, at about 6.00 or 7.00 p.m., A-1 and A-5 went to the house of A-4. At that time, wife of P.W.1 (P.W.5) asked A-1 for repayment of the amount due to the deceased. They picked up a quarrel with the wife of P.W.1 also, which was informed to P.W.1 and the deceased, who were at their provisions shop. Then, the deceased went and questioned A-4 about the quarrel with his mother. At that point of time, all the accused threw chilly powder on the face of the deceased. Then, A-1 is said to have beat the deceased on his head with a chutney pestle as a result of which, the deceased sustained bleeding injury on his head and fell on the ground. Hearing the galata, other witnesses rushed to that place. The accused threw chilly powder on them also. The injured was taken to Government Hospital, Chilakaluripet and after giving first aid in the Government Hospital, he was advised to be taken to Government General Hospital, Guntur for better treatment. The Doctor in the hospital advised for a surgery to be conducted on the head of the deceased and as such, an operation was performed. The deceased/injured is said to have survived for two days and later, died.
Law was set into motion at the instance of P.W.11, who was working as Sub Inspector of Police, Chilakaluripet. On 18.07.2005, at about 10.30 p.m., he received information from the Government General Hospital, Chilakaluripet vide Ex.P-7. Immediately, he proceeded to the hospital and found the injured in Casuality Department. He claims to have recorded the statement of the injured, obtained his thumb impression, read out the contents in Telugu and basing on the said statement, which is placed on record as Ex.P-8, registered a case in Crime No.175 of 2005 for the offence punishable under Section 324 read with 34 I.P.C. against all the accused. Ex.P-9 is the original F.I.R. He examined P.Ws.1 to 5 and recorded their statements. On the next day morning, at 7.45 a.m., he along with mediators, proceeded to the scene of offence and prepared a panchanama of the scene, which is placed on record as Ex.P-1. He also got prepared Ex.P-10 – rough sketch of the scene. At the scene, he examined P.Ws.6, 7 and others and recorded their statements. On 20.07.2005, while P.W.11 was in the police station, received intimation about the death of the deceased from the Government General Hospital, Guntur under Ex.P-5. Immediately, he altered the section of law from Section 324 read with 34 I.P.C. to 302 read with 34 I.P.C. and issued Ex.P-11 – altered F
Jaswant Singh v. State of Haryana
Surajpal Singh & Others v. State
Madan Mohan Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Atley v. State of U.P., AIR 1955 SC 807
Aher Raja Khima v. State of Saurashtra
Point of Law : Power of an Appellate Court to review evidence in appeals against acquittal is as extensive as its powers in appeals against convictions, but that power is with a note of caution that ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for corroboration and consistency in dying declarations, and the principle of giving the benefit of doubt to the accused when two r....
principles relating to interference by the High Court in appeals against acquittal are well settled. While the High Court can review the entire evidence and reach its own conclusions, it will not int....
The essential ingredients of the offence under Section 306 IPC are (i) the abetment; (ii) the intention of the accused to aid or instigate or abet the deceased to commit suicide.
Appeal against acquittal – Accused having secured his acquittal, presumption of his innocence is further reaffirmed and strengthened by trial Court.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the admissibility and evaluation of the dying declaration, the requirement of the doctor's certificate for the fitness of the victim to make a stat....
The trial court's acquittal based on technicalities disregarded substantial eyewitness and medical evidence, necessitating a retrial.
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.