IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
K.SURESH REDDY, K.SREENIVASA REDDY, JJ.
Challa Padmavathi, Ananthapur Dist. – Appellant
Versus
P.P., Hyd And 30 Others – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No.827 OF 2016
Decided on : 19-08-2024
Acquittal - Criminal Appeal - IPC Sections 148, 302, 324, 427, 436 - The court emphasized the presumption of innocence and the necessity of compelling reasons to overturn an acquittal, highlighting inconsistencies in witness testimonies and lack of corroborative evidence.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a violent incident in which the deceased was attacked by a group of accused, resulting in his death. The prosecution alleged that the accused formed an unlawful assembly and caused injuries to the deceased and others, leading to charges under various IPC sections.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, citing inconsistencies in witness testimonies and lack of reliable evidence.
Issues: Whether the prosecution established the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and if there were grounds to interfere with the acquittal.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that the presumption of innocence remains until proven guilty, and an acquittal should not be disturbed without compelling reasons, especially when witness testimonies are inconsistent.
Result: The Criminal Appeal is dismissed, confirming the acquittal of the accused.
JUDGMENT:
(per the Hon’ble Sri Justice K.Sreenivasa Reddy)
This Criminal Appeal, by the appellant/defacto complainant (P.W.1), is directed against the judgment dated 18.05.2016 passed in Sessions Case No.342 of 2006 on the file of the III Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Anantapuram, whereby respondents/A.1 to A.13, A.16 to A.18, A.20 to A.27 and A.30 were found not guilty of the charges leveled against them and are accordingly acquitted of the said charges.
2. Originally, charge sheet was filed against A.1 to A.29. Subsequently, during the course of trial, as per Order dated 23.10.2009 in Crl.M.P.No.77 of 2009, A.30 was added as an accused. During pendency of the case before the trial Court, A.14, A.15, A.19, A.28 and A.29 died and hence the learned Sessions Judge abated case against them.
3. The substance of the charges framed against the accused is that on 25.06.2004 at about 6.00 AM in Gotkuru village, all the accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, entered into house of the Challa Sreenivasulu (hereinafter referred to, as ‘the deceased’), intentionally or knowingly beat him with sticks, stones and sickles indiscriminately, resulting in his instantaneous death. In furtherance of their common object, all the accused beat P.Ws.1 to 6 and thereby caused injuries. All the accused committed mischief by causing wrongful loss to the property of the deceased of a value of Rs.1.00 lakh and further destructed the building which was ordinarily used for place of worship for human dwelling or custody.
4. The deceased and the accused belong to Gotkuru village. The deceased belongs to Telugu Desam party and the accused belong to Congress Party. There was political rivalry between them and they were waiting for a chance to attack each other. Accordingly, on 24.06.2004 at about 6.00 PM, one Nagabhushanam of TDP was attacked by the followers of A.1 and a case in crime No.37 of 2004 was registered by Kuderu police in connection with the said attack. On 25.06.2004 at about 6.00 AM, while A.1, A.4 and A.21 were going in Gotkuru village, they were attacked by the deceased, his wife and brother of Nagaghushanam, causing bleeding injuries. On coming to know about the said incident, A.1, A.4, A.21 and other accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with a common object of attacking the deceased and others. Accordingly, they went to house of the deceased, armed with sticks, stones and sickles, and on seeing the mob, the deceased went inside and bolted the door from inside. On that, some of the accused went on to the terrace of the house and made a hole in the roof, whereas some other accused forcibly broke open the door, trespassed into the house of the deceased, dragged him out of the house and attacked him. On the instigation of A.21, A.1 took a big stone and hit the deceased on his head due to which brain matter came out of the skull, which caused instantaneous death of the deceased. When P.W.1, 19 and 11 intervened, the accused attacked them causing bleeding injuries. Some of the accused entered house of the deceased, damaged household articles, set fire to agricultural produce and thus caused damage to a tune of Rs.1.00 lakh.
Thereafter, the accused divided into five groups and raided houses of Dudekula Lalu Sab, Chakala Surappa, Dudekula Pedda Mahaboob Peera and K.Hanumanthu and beat L.W.6-K.Ramudu, L.W.7-K.Jayappa, L.W.8-Lalu Sab, L.W.9-D.Mahammad, L.W.5-Haji Peera with sticks and stones and caused bleeding injuries. A.1 to A.6 trespassed in the house of L.W.8-Lalu Saheb, L.W.16-C.Jayanna, L.W.9- D.Mahammad, L.W.5-Hajipeera and L.W.19-K.Hanumanthu and damaged their household articles.
L.Ws.12 to 14-Police Constables, who were on bandobast duty, reached the scene of offence, but they were also attacked by the accused with stones causing bleeding injuries. On coming to know about the rioting in the village, the Sub Inspector of Police, Kuderu police station along with staff reached the scene of offence and don seeing them, t
Ajmer Singh v. State of Punjab
Harbans Singh & another v. the State of Punjab
Harchand Singh and another v. State of Haryana
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....
Prosecution must substantiate charges with reliable evidence; significant discrepancies in witness statements and medical evidence warrant acquittal.
A conviction cannot be based solely on the testimony of one witness unless that testimony is wholly reliable and corroborated by other evidence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for reliability and consistency in witness testimonies and evidence presented by the prosecution to establish guilt beyond reasonable doub....
The appellate court affirmed that collective participation in unlawful assembly under IPC Section 149 holds all members culpable for resulting violent acts, despite minor evidential discrepancies.
The appellate court overturned the acquittal of the accused by establishing that reliable eyewitness and medical evidence confirmed their formation of an unlawful assembly leading to murder.
The judgment underscores the principle that a conviction cannot be based solely on the testimony of a single witness unless it is wholly reliable and corroborated by other evidence.
Eyewitness testimony corroborated by medical evidence can establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt in murder cases involving conspiracy and unlawful assembly.
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.