Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY, SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR, JJ
Mamidi Bangari (A-1),Vizianagaram District – Appellant
Versus
State of A.P., Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, Hyderabad – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K.Suresh Reddy, J.
A.1 to A.5 in S.C.No.14/2012 on the file of learned III Additional District & Sessions Judge at Vizianagaram–cum-Judge, Family Court are the appellants in the present appeal. They were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge under the following charges:
First charge was under Section 302 IPC against A.1 and A.2.
Second charge was under Section 302 r/w 34 IPC against A.3 to A.5.
Third charge was under Section 324 IPC against A.3 for causing injuries to PW.2.
Fourth charge was under Section 323 IPC against A.4 and A.5, and Last charge was under Section 323 IPC for causing injuries to PW.2.
2. Substance of the charge against the accused is that on 01.01.2011 at about 7.30 P.M., while A.1 and A.2 were quarrelling in front of the house of Boddana Appanna (hereinafter referred to as ‘the deceased’) at Kurakula Veedhi, Poram Village, Mentada Mandal, the deceased questioned them. Then, A.1 beat him with a Spade on his head and A.2 beat him on his head with a pestle, who fell down, and when PW.2 intervened, A.3 to A.5 beat him with a spade and A.4 and A.5 kicked him with hands and legs and thereafter the deceased succumbed to injuries on 03.01.2011 while underg
The prosecution failed to prove the involvement of A.2, A.4, and A.5 in the crime, while sufficient evidence supported the conviction of A.1 for murder.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between culpable homicide and murder, based on the absence of premeditation, undue advantage, or cruel behavior by the accused.
Absence of common intention to kill limits murder convictions under S.302 IPC, shifting liability to lesser charges under S.325 IPC.
The court established that mere pushing resulting in death does not equate to murder without intent, affirming the need for clear intent in homicide cases.
(1) Obscene acts – Mere use of word ‘bastard’, by itself, is not sufficient to arouse prurient interest of a person.(2) To convict accused for commission of offence punishable under Section 304 Part ....
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
