THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL APPEAL No.517 OF 2014

O R D E R:

This Criminal Appeal is filed seeking to set aside the judgment, conviction and sentence imposed against the appellants/accused Nos.1 and 3 in C.C.No.1 of 2013 dated 17.04.2014 on the file of the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Karimnagar, at Jagtial (for short, “the trial Court”).

2. Heard Mr.M.Veera Prasada Chary, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.E.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent-State.

3. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution are that on the night of 31.12.2011, de facto complainant, his younger brother by name Gangadhar along with others namely Chilmula Shekar, Sunil, Vamshi, Nagaraju, Chiranjeevi and Thirupathi attended a party hosted by one Naluvala Rajam; that after the party, on the request of one Thirupathi, the younger brother of de facto complainant took him on the motorbike to drop him at his house; that after dropping him and while he was returning on the way, he was stopped by A1, A3 and A5 and one Nalavula Narsaiah; all of them questioned him as to why he is supporting one Bali Narsaiah in the land dispute, and by asking so, all of them, beat him with sticks and hands, thereby causing bleeding injuries; that with the said injuries, the younger brother of de facto complainant came to the house and narrated about the incident to de facto complainant and asked him to question them. Thereupon, the de facto complainant questioned them. Then, the accused beat de facto complainant with sticks and pelted stones and caused bleeding injuries; that the said incident was witnessed by Evusam Thirupathi, Erra Chiranjeevi, Munjam Rajam and Myadam Sahadev.

4. Thereafter, the de facto complainant lodged a complaint with the police. Basing on that complaint, the respondent-police registered a crime against A1, the deceased father of A1, A3 to A5 for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 324 r/w 149 of I.P.C. and during the course of investigation, collected sufficient material and charge sheeted A1, A3 and A5.

5. The trial Court, vide judgment dated 17.04.2014 in C.C.No.1 of 2013 held as follows:-

“In the result, A1, A3 to A5 are found guilty for the offences of Sec.148 and 324 r/w 149 of I.P.C. and they are convicted U/s.248(2) of Cr.P.C. The Accused No.1 and A3 are sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of one year for the offence of Sec.148 of IPC, and for the offence of Section 324 of IPC they are sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of two years. The sentences of imprisonments on both the counts shall run concurrently U/s.427 Cr.P.C.

The A4 and A5 against whom this court inclined to take a lenient view in imposing the sentence on account of their tender age are ordered to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each for the offence of Sec.148 of IPC and also to pay an amount of Rs.3,000/- each for the offence of Sec.324 of IPC. The total fine amount is of Rs.4,000/- each and in default of fine, they have to suffer Simple Imprisonment for a period of one month.

The period of Judicial detention of A1 and A3 which they have undergone from 7-11-2013 to 12-11-2013 shall be treated as set off U/s.428 Cr.P.C.”

Aggrieved by the same, the appellants preferred the present Appeal.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the trial Court failed to appreciate the evidence of PW3/the Doctor who treated PWs.1 and 2, who clearly deposed that the noticed lacerated injuries are simple in nature. Hence, the offence alleged under Section 324 of IPC is not attracted in the case on hand. He states that the appellants were inflicted with injuries due to the attack made by PWs.1 and 2 and accused No.2 who sustained injuries died; that as counter blast to Crime No.1 of 2012 the present complaint is lodged basing on false and frivolous allegations with an abnormal delay and it is fatal to the case of the prosecution. Therefore, he seeks to allow the Appeal.

7. Learned Assistant Publi