An acquittal should not be disturbed without substantial evidence against the acquitted; the presumption of innocence is a crucial standard in criminal appeals.

JUDGMENT :

P.SAM KOSHY, J.

The instant is an appeal under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 filed by the appellant/complainant challenging the judgment of acquittal passed by the IX Additional District and Sessions Judge, Wanaparthy (for short, the ‘Trial Court’) in S.C.No.282 of 2012.

2. Since the counsel who was appearing for the appellant had not been representing for long, Ms. Ande Vishala, was appointed as Amicus Curiae to represent the appellant vide order dated 19.02.2024. Accordingly, the matter was argued on behalf of the appellant by Ms. Ande Vishala and the learned Public Prosecutor argued on behalf of the respondents/accused.

3. Vide the impugned judgment, the six (06) accused persons i.e. respondent Nos.1 to 6 in the present appeal were acquitted from the charges punishable under Section 148 , 302, 302 read with Section 149 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860.

4. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the dispute revolves around a land that situates in Survey Nos.154 and 15 admeasuring Ac.6-00 which was assigned by the Government in favour of twelve (12) families including the accused and Balaraju (hereinafter the ‘deceased’). Some dispute arose in between the twelve (12) families in respect of the said land. The said land was given to one Golla Ramulu for a lease amount of Rs.24,000/-. The said Golla Ramulu paid the lease amount to the accused No.6 who in turn was required to disburse the said amount to the twelve (12) families. However, in the course of disbursement, the share which fell to the deceased was not paid which gave rise to the dispute. On demand of his share in the lease amount, the accused persons are said to have joined together and assaulted the deceased and the matter was reported to the police station where a crime No.149 of 2011 was registered against the accused persons. This filing of the First Information Report (for short, the ‘FIR’) and registering of the crime led to the accused persons having grudge against the deceased and the family members.

5. That on 12.09.2011 at around 11:30 PM when the deceased was returning from the field after watering the crops reached in front of the house of Rampogu Balaswamy, the accused persons attacked the deceased with sticks and hunting sickles on account of which the deceased received grievous injuries to which he later succumbed. PWs.2 and 3 are said to be the eye witnesses to the incident and it is PW.2 who is said to have informed PW.1 (Jyothi), the wife of the deceased. It is also said that PWs.6 and 11 have also witnessed the incident.

6. The complaint was lodged by PW.1 at Pebbair Police Station. The accused persons were named in the FIR where it was registered as crime No.149 of 2011 at Police Station, Pebbair, Mahabubnagar District. All the accused persons were charged for the offences punishable under Section 148 , 302, 302 read with Section 149 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and the matter was put to trial. In all twelve (12) witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution and five (05) witnesses were examined on behalf of the defence. Initially, when the FIR was lodged, the appellant had named fourteen (14) persons who had joined together in assaulting the deceased. The names of fourteen (14) accused persons are as under:

I. S. Chandrayudu S/o. Madanna

II. S. Anjaneyulu S/o. Chinnaiah

III. S. Hanumanthu S/o. Kurmanna

IV. S. Raju S/o. Chinna Kurmanna

V. S. Kurumurthy S/o. Jampanna

VI. S. Pedda Kurmanna S/o. Maddanna

VII. S. Ramulu S/o. Chinnaiah

VIII. K. Bojjanna S/o. Narsanna

IX. Balaswamy S/o. Yellanna

X. Podugu Kurmanna S/o. Kistanna

XI. P. Venkatesh S/o. Sunkanna

XII. M. Chandraih S/o. Kista