Back
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
*N. Y. Hanumanthappa, V. Bhaskara Rao, JJ.
A.1 to A.3, A.5 to A.13, A.15 to A.19, A.26 and A.38 – Appellant
Versus
A.14, A.20 and A.35 – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. accused involved in a premeditated attack. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. details of the violent incident and injuries. (Para 4) |
| 3. charges framed against the accused. (Para 8 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. arguments made by prosecution and defense. (Para 12 , 15) |
| 5. witness accounts and their credibility. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 6. legal implications of lack of proof. (Para 28 , 29) |
| 7. discrepancies and unreliability in testimony. (Para 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 8. conclusion leading to ruling in favor of appellants. (Para 34 , 35) |
1. These appeals are directed against the judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Guntur in S.C. No. 209 of 1991 dated 18-5-1995. Criminal Appeal No. 336 of 1995 is filed by the accused Nos. 1 to 3, 5 to 13, 15 to 19, 26 and 38; and Criminal Appeal No. 337 of 1995 is filed by A.14, A.20 and A.35. During the pendency of the trial, A.36 and A.41 died. Before the Sessions Court, A.1 to A.44 were tried for various offences, the details of which are shown hereunder :
The accusation made against the accused is that on 24-4-1990 at 6.00 p.m., all the accused armed with axes, bombs, spears, sticks and stones caused the death of one Yadla Siva Ramiah near the house of Malladi Nageswa
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
