Back
K. SURESH REDDY, K. SREENIVASA REDDY
Yerraballi Rajesh – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(K. Suresh Reddy, J.)
1. Sole accused in Sessions Case No. 85 of 2014 on the file of the Court of learned Principal Sessions Judge, Prakasam District at Ongole (for short, 'the trial Court'), is the appellant. He was tried and convicted by the trial Court for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, 'IPC') and was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six months.
2. Substance of the charge is that on 18-09-2012 in the afternoon, the accused beat one Kodamala Nayomi (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') on her head with an iron rod near Gangamadugu Vagu in between Rallapalli-Vedullacheruvu Villages causing her death, thereby committed the ‹offence punishable under Section 302 IPC
3. Case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:
The deceased was a resident of Punugodu Village and her marriage was performed with one Daniel about six years .pr r to her date of death. Due to some disputes between the deceased and her husband, the former left the company of the latter and started living with her mother-P.W.2. P.Ws.3 and 4 are brother and sister of th
The prosecution must prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt; mere suspicion is insufficient for conviction.
The court affirmed the conviction for murder and destruction of evidence, emphasizing the accused's failure to provide a reasonable explanation for the death of his wife.
The judgment establishes that child witness testimony, if credible and corroborated, can be sufficient for conviction, alongside the admissibility of extra-judicial confessions.
The court established that credible child witness testimony, when corroborated, can support a conviction, alongside the admissibility of extra judicial confessions.
The necessity of strong and corroborative evidence in murder cases, particularly when relying on circumstantial evidence, was emphasized, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
The court established that intent to kill, evidenced by eyewitness testimony and medical findings, is crucial for a conviction under Section 302 IPC.
A conviction based on the sole testimony of a witness requires that testimony to be credible and corroborated; inconsistencies and lack of reliability render such convictions unsustainable.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, especially in cases relying on circumstantial evidence, and the benefit of doubt must be given to the accused.
Instigation alone does not establish culpability for murder if the accused did not directly participate in the act of violence.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
