SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(AP) 1556

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI
A.V. RAVINDRA BABU, J.
Eepu Lovathalli @ Lovaraju, S/o Rajulu – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.177 of 2009
Decided on : 08-09-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Sri Rama Krishna, A.
For the Respondent: Public Prosecutor

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 302 and 324 r/w 34 - Appeal against conviction - Appellants A.1 and A.2 were convicted for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, while A.3 and A.4 were convicted for causing injuries - The prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that A.1 and A.2 indiscriminately beat the deceased leading to his death while defense's claim of self-defense was found unsubstantiated - The court emphasized that the accused were the aggressors, and the injuries on A.1 and A.2 were minor and not fatal, failing to affect the prosecution's case - The judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge was sustainable and dismissed the appeal, thus confirming the conviction and sentence. (Paras 9, 11, 60, and 66)

(B) Criminal Procedure - Duties of an Investigating Officer - Investigating officers must explain injuries on both the accused and victim; failure to do so can be fatal to prosecution in certain cases but not in this instance as the presence of A.1 and A.2 at the scene was not in dispute. (Paras 58 and 60)

JUDGMENT :

The judgment, dated 09.02.2009 in Sessions Case No.304 of 2007, on the file of III Additional Sessions Judge, Kakinada (“Additional Sessions Judge” for short), is under challenge in the present Criminal Appeal filed by the appellant Nos.1 and 2, who were the Accused Nos.1 and 2, in the above said Sessions Case.

2) The parties to this Criminal Appeal will hereinafter be referred to as described before the trial Court for the sake of convenience.

3) The Sessions Case No.304 of 2007, on the file of III Additional Sessions Judge, Kakinada, arose out of a committal order in P.R.C.No.3 of 2007, on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Turni, relating to Crime No.5 of 2007 of Tuni Rural Police Station.

4) The case of the prosecution, in brief, according to the contents of the charge sheet as above, is as follows:

(i) A.1, A.2 and A.4 are residents of Seethayyapeta, h/o Velama Kothuru Village of Tuni Mandal. They are own brothers. A.3 is resident of Mukundarajupeta Village of Nakkapalli Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. He is a cousin to A.1, A.2 and A.3. One Gorla Veerraju S/o Satyanarayana (hereinafter will be referred to as “deceased”), was resident of Seethayyapeta, h/o Velama Kothuru Village of Tuni Mandal. The defacto-complainant-Gorla Babji (L.W.1) and another injured Gorla Nageswara Rao (L.W.2) are own brothers. They are the sons of deceased. The deceased was having two wives viz., Satyavathi and Gorla Appalakonda- L.W.3. He got two sons and one daughter to his first wife- Satyavathi. Five years ago, Satyavathi passed away. Later, the marriage of her daughter and elder son Gorla Srinu (L.W.9) was performed by the deceased. Marriage L.W.9 was performed with L.W.10-Gorla Arjamma, who is no other than the own sister’s daughter of the deceased. Arjamma is own sister of A.1, A.2 and A.4.

(ii) On the eve of Pongal festival, L.W.9-Gorla Srinu, the son of the first wife of deceased, went to his in-laws house along with his wife Arjamma. On 16.01.2007 afternoon, he had a quarrel with his wife, during which he beat his mother-in-law with a stick when she intervened in the middle. Then A.1, A.2 and A.4 being the brother-in-laws of L.W.9 assaulted him. Then L.W.9 threatened them that he would take care of them by bringing his father and brothers and left the house of his in-laws and went to the house of the deceased. He raised a dispute with the deceased on the ground that the deceased and the sons of his second wife are not supporting him, due to which he became lenient among his brothers-in-law. During the said conversation, the deceased beat L.W.9.

(iii) A.1, A.2 and A.4 with A.3 were waiting at the end of the street expecting that the deceased and his sons would support the cause of L.W.9. So, they raided the house of the deceased at 3-00 p.m., armed with sticks and picked up quarrel with the deceased for sending his son L.W.9 to draw Swords against them. Then a verbal altercation took place between A.1 to A.4 on one side and the deceased on the other side. In that quarrel, A.1 and A.2 indiscriminately beat the deceased with sticks on his head. When on seeing this, L.W.2 intervened to rescue the deceased, A.3 dealt two hefty blows on his head and right hand elbow. Then L.W.1 intervened and then A.4 beat him with a stick on his head and left side of the neck. They caused bleeding injuries to him. During that struggle A.1 and A.2 also received injuries in the hands of their adversaries. On seeing the incident and when the neighbours gathered, A.1 to A.4 fled away from the spot with their sticks. The deceased, L.W.1 and L.W.2 were referred to Government Area Hospital, Tuni by their family members on the same day. On 16.01.2007 at 5-35 p.m., the deceased died while undergoing treatment in Government Hospital, Tuni.

(iv) On the basis of the hospital intimation and the statement of L.W.1, L.W.19-Sub-Inspector of Police, Tuni Rural Police Station, registered a case in Crime No.5 of 2007 under Sections 302 , 324 r/w 34 of I.P.C. L.W.2

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top