IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K.LAKSHMAN, VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, JJ.
Mr. Modala Veeraiah, S/o. Narsaiah – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Telangana, Rep.By Its Public Prosecutor – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.249 Of 2017
Decided On : 15-12-2025
JUDGMENT:
K. Lakshman, J.
1. Heard Mrs. G. Jaya Reddy, learned counsel for appellant -accused and Dr. S. Prashanth, learned Assistant Public Prosecutorappearing on behalf of the respondent.
2. This appeal is filed challenging the judgment dated 16.01.2017 in S.C. No.277 of 2012 passed by learned Principal Sessions Judge, Nalgonda.
3. Vide the aforesaid judgment, the trial Court convicted the appellant - accused for the offences under Section - 302 of IPC and Section - 27 (2) of the Indian Arms Act, 1959 and accordingly sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.1,000 (Rupees One Thousand Only) and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six (06) months for the offences each.
4. The case of the prosecution is as follows:
i) It is a case of murder occurred on 07.11.2010.
ii) Deceased - Ch. Gopi Venkata Narayana was working as Head Constable with G.No.626 at 12th Battalionb, APSP, Anneparthy, Nalgonda District. PW.5 and LW.7 are wife and brother-in-law of the deceased respectively.
iii) The appellant herein is the accused and he was appointed as Police Constable in the same battalion on 01.09.1999.
iv) The accused got married to his niece (daughter of his sister), namely Mangamma. She was blessed with a male child, who is a dumb. The accused used to quarrel with her and sent her back to her parents’ house. Thereafter, he divorced her.
v) The accused again married PW.14 on 20.05.2002. She was also blessed with two daughters in the years 2003 and 2005 respectively.
vi) After giving birth to second daughter, they were staying in Government Quarters at 12th Battalion, APSP, Anneparthy. Since then, the accused started suspecting the character of PW.14 and used to harass her, both mentally and physically.
vii) The deceased was working as Head Constable in the said battalion and he too was residing in the residential quarters of the battalion. The accused observed the deceased was moving closely with his wife and tortured her, both mentally and physically and bore grudge against him.
viii) While so, on 23.01.2007, the accused beat his wife indiscriminately under the pretext of she developed illegal sexual relationship with the deceased and caused injuries. Therefore, she lodged a report against him with Women Police Station, Nalgonda, who in turn registered a case in Crime No.20 of 2007 for the offences under Sections - 498A and 324 of IPC . The accused was kept under suspension. Since then, the wife of the accused had been residing at her parent’s house at Suryapet.
ix) After one year, suspension orders were revoked and accused started performing duties. Thus, the accused bore grudge against the deceased and waiting for an opportunity to take revenge.
x) On 07.11.2010 at 17:00 hours, PW.1 deputed the deceased, accused, PW.2, PW.3 and LW.4 for performing sentry duty at rearguard situated on the first floor of the Upper Primary School, within the premises of battalion headquarters. The guard personnel were allotted with SLR weapons and 100 rounds ammunition each. The deceased took charge as guard in-charge from PW.8. PW.2 mounted on sentry duty from 17:00 hours to 19:00 hours. The accused, who was in waiting and the deceased were present in the guard room while PW.2 was performing the sentry duty by standing in the sentry post which is on the top. The accused taking advantage of the situation, decided to kill the deceased. The accused took his SLR weapon bearing butt No.672, loaded the same and targeted at the deceased. The deceased alerted on hearing the cocking sound of SLR weapon and started climbing the ladder to reach the sentry post on the top to escape from the accused. But, the accused aimed at the deceased and fired four rounds and caused bullet injuries on the chest, abdomen and head of the deceased. As a result of which, the deceased collapsed on the ladder. The accused left the SLR weapon at scene of crime and ran way. PW.2 who witnessed the incident informed the same to his Higher Officials immediat
The court confirmed the conviction for murder under IPC, establishing that motive and evidence proved the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, while setting aside the conviction under the Arms Ac....
(1) ‘Motive’ is distinct from ‘object and means’ which innervates or provokes an action – Unlike ‘intention’, ‘motive’ is not the yardstick of a crime.(2) Illegal use of a licensed or sanctioned weap....
Acquittal upheld where prosecution fails to prove intent to commit murder beyond reasonable doubt.
A conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires establishing a complete chain of events proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and procedural issues do not negate overwhelming substantive evid....
Murder and grievous hurt – Fatal injury inflicted by sword on chest of victim is offence of murder under Section 302 of IPC.
Under such backdrop the conviction of the appellant under section 27 of Arms Act is maintained.
The refusal of the accused to undergo TIP, the recovery of the weapon of offence, and the consistent testimony of eyewitnesses can establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Minor injuries do not negate culpability for attempt to commit murder; intention inferred from actions and circumstances surrounding the act.
In cases of direct evidence, the presence or absence of motive is less significant, and credible eyewitness testimony can suffice to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.