IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI, JJ.
Sampathi Nagaraju & Another, S/o. Gangulappa and Anr. – Petitioners
Versus
The State Of A.P., Rep.by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature, At Hyderabad – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 47 Of 2016
Decided On : 30-11-2022
FIR - Conviction - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 364, 302 r/w.34 - Summary: The court acquitted the appellants A.3 and A.4 for the offences punishable under Section 364 and 302 r/w.34 I.P.C due to inconsistencies and contradictions in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. The court found that the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 was unreliable and full of glaring contradictions, leading to the benefit of doubt given to the appellants.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased was forcibly taken from his house and killed. The prosecution's case was based on the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2, who reported the incident to the police. However, their evidence was found to be inconsistent and unreliable.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 was unreliable and full of glaring contradictions, leading to the benefit of doubt given to the appellants.
Issues: Reliability of the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2, inconsistencies in the FIR and inquest report, and the conduct of the witnesses.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the inconsistencies and contradictions in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, leading to the benefit of doubt given to the appellants.
Final Decision: The court acquitted the appellants A.3 and A.4 for the offences punishable under Section 364 and 302 r/w.34 I.P.C due to inconsistencies and contradictions in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses.
JUDGMENT :
(C. Praveen Kumar, J.)
The present appeal came to be filed by A.3 and A.4 against their conviction in a Sessions Case No.712 of 2012 on the file of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hindupur.
2. Originally, A.1 to A.4 were tried for the offences punishable under Section 364 and 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 [for short, “I.P.C.”]. As A.1 and A.2 died, the case against them was abated. A.3 and A.4 were found guilty under both the counts and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of Ten years and also to pay fine of Rs.5000/- each for the offence punishable under Section 364 I.P.C. They were further sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for Life and also to pay fine of Rs.5000/- each for the offence under Section 302 r/w. Section 34 I.P.C, in default of payment of fine amounts imposed as above, they were directed to undergo Simple Imprisonment for Two years. The substantive sentences shall run concurrently.
3. The facts, as culled out from the evidence of prosecution witnesses, are as under:-
(b) On 11.05.2011 at about 10.00 p.m. to 11.00 p.m. A.2 and A.3 came to the house of P.W.1 while A.1 and A.4 were in Sumo. A.2 and A.3 knocked the door of the house and on hearing the sound, P.W.1 put on the light and opened the door. The deceased questioned A.2 and A.3 why they came, for which, A.2 and A.3 replied that they came for a panchayat regarding the property. The deceased informed A.2 and A.3 that at this late night, he is not coming out for a panchayat. At that point of time, A.2 and A.3 forcibly took away the deceased in a Sumo belong to P.W.6.
(c) It is said that all the accused abducted the deceased in a Sumo towards Nagireddipalli side. As her husband did not return till next day morning, the family members informed P.W.4 at 6.00 a.m. and then all of them proceeded to Kadiri to enquire as to whereabouts of the deceased, with the Sumo driver/Phani Kumar, who was examined as P.W.6. P.W.6 disclosed that A.1 to A.4 beat the deceased and after killing the deceased, the accused sunk him in Maddileru Vanka. According to P.W.6 due to fear he ran away in a jeep to his place. Having regard to the information furnished by P.W.6, P.W.1 along with P.W.2 proceeded to Police Station where to the dictation of P.W.2, a report was drafted.
(d) P.W.15-Inspector of Police, who received the report and registered the same as a case in Crime No.26 of 2011 under Section 364, 302 r/w.34 I.P.C. Ex.P11 is the F.I.R. After registering the crime, he proceeded to the scene of offence situated at Maddileru Vanka and noticed the dead body in the canal. He summoned the relatives and with the help of villagers, the dead body was removed and placed on the bund. At the scene, he prepared a rough sketch of the scene which is marked as Ex.P12. He then conducted inquest over the dead body in the presence of panch witnesses. Ex.P5 is the inquest report. During the inquest, the witnesses opined that the A.1/Nagesh had disputes with the deceased, as he took the ancestral property by misguiding their father in his favour and since then quarrels were taking place. It is said that A.1 with the help of A.2 to A.4 planned and on 10.05.2011 at about 10.00 p.m. took the deceased from his house and thereafter killed him. After conducting the inquest, the body was handed over to P.C.No.1944 with a requisition to the Medical Officer, Government Area Hospital, Kadiri to
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of reliable and consistent evidence in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of reliable and convincing evidence in proving the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
THE EVIDENCE OF EYEWITNESSES IS CREDIBLE AND INSPIRING CONFIDENCE. NON-SUPPORTING SUCH A VERSION BY INDEPENDENT WITNESSES WOULD BE NO GROUNDS, TO DISCARD THEIR TESTIMONY. THE PRESENCE OF PWS.1 AND 2 ....
A conviction cannot be based solely on the testimony of one witness unless that testimony is wholly reliable and corroborated by other evidence.
The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused caused the death of the deceased in order to secure a conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Pa....
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.