important point
The essential conditions for the application of Section 34 IPC are common intention to commit an offence and participation by all the accused in doing act or acts in furtherance of that common intention.

judgment

G.P. Mathur, J. —

1.This appeal under Section 2 of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970 has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 2.3.2006 of Andhra Pradesh High Court, by which the appeal filed by the State was allowed and the judgment and order dated 24.9.2002 of the learned Sessions Judge, Guntur acquitting the two accused in Sessions Case No.466 of 2000 was set aside. The High Court by the impugned judgment and order convicted both the accused Shaik Khasim Saida (A-1) and Shaik China Brahmam (A-2) under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced them to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.200/- each.

2.The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Shaik Khasim Saida (A-1) had borrowed Rs.300/- from the deceased Shaik Masthan Vali some time back, but he did not repay the amount due to which their relations became strained. At about 4.00 p.m. on 6.4.1999, the deceased Shaik Masthan Vali and his cousin Shaik Baba Vali (PW.1) were returning to the village from northern side of Chandravanka rivulet after attending the call of nature. Both the accused suddenly appeared on the spot. A-1 stabbed the deceased Shaik Masthan Vali repeatedly with a knife which he has carrying and A-2 caused injuries to the deceased with iron pipe. After receiving injuries the deceased fell down dead on the spot. PW.1 Shaik Baba Vali lodged an FIR at P.S. Macherla at 6.30 p.m. on the same day. On the basis of the FIR a crime was registered as Case Crime No.55 of 1999 under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC at the police station.

3.After the case had been registered at the police station, PW.8 K. Babu Rao, Inspector of Police, P.S. Macherla commenced investigation of the case. He arrested A-1 and A-2 and went to the scene of occurrence and prepared a site plan. After recording statement of witnesses, he submitted charge-sheet against both the accused A-1 and A-2. The prosecution in order to establish its case examined nine witnesses and filed some documentary evidence. The learned Sessions Judge, Guntur, by the judgment and order dated 24.9.2002 acquitted both the accused A-1 and A-2. Feeling aggrieved by the order of the learned Sessions Judge, the State filed appeal in the High Court, which was allowed and accused were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and were sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.200/- each. The present appeal has been filed only by Shaik China Brahmam (A-2). It appears that Shaik Khasim Saida (A-1) has not preferred any appeal against his conviction and sentence.

4.We have heard Mr. I.V. Narayana, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms. Altaf Fathima, learned counsel for the State of Andhra Pradesh and have perused the record.

5.The case basically rests on the testimony of PW.1 Shaik Baba Vali. He has deposed that his house is situate near Chennakesava Swamy Temple in Macherla and both the accused viz. A-1 and A-2 are also residents of the same place. The deceased Shaik Masthan Vali was also resident of Macherla. The deceased had informed him that A-1 had borrowed money from him and had not returned the same and due to this their relations had become strained. At about 4.00 p.m. on 6.4.1999, he and deceased Shaik Masthan Vali had gone to the field by the side of Chandravanka rivulet for answering the call of nature. Thereafter, they were returning home and the deceased was little behind him. Suddenly he saw that A-1 had caught hold of the deceased by putting his arm around his neck and then he started giving him repeated blows by a knife. A-2 also assaulted the deceased with an iron pipe. The deceased raised an alarm. When PW.1 tried to save the deceased, both the accused threatened him that they would also assault him. The deceased Shaik Masthan Vali snatched the knife from the hands of A-1, but A-1 again snatched back the knife from the deceased and gave him several blows. In the process of snatching the knife, the han