Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K.LAKSHMAN, VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY
Modala Veeraiah, S/o. Narsaiah – Appellant
Versus
State Of Telangana, Rep.By Its Public Prosecutor – Respondent
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 hi
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.
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
