Back
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : GHULAM MOHAMMED, R.M.BAPAT
Shaik Subhani @ Bombay Subhani - Appellant
Versus
State OF A.P. - Respondent
Decided On : 08-11-99
CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 302 IPC - MURDER - EVIDENCE - EYE-WITNESS TESTIMONY - RELIABILITY - CORROBORATION - SECTION 326 IPC - GRIEVOUS HURT - CONVICTION AND SENTENCE.
Fact of the Case:
Accused-appellants were convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for stabbing and hacking the deceased. The prosecution relied on the testimony of an eye-witness (PW1), who was the deceased's sister, and medical evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence of PW1 was neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable, as she had attributed overt acts to two other accused (A3 and A4) in court that she had not mentioned in her initial statement to the police. However, the court found that PW1's testimony was corroborated by medical evidence, which showed that the deceased had sustained grievous injuries to the abdomen and ear.
Issues: 1. Whether the evidence of PW1 was reliable and sufficient to convict the accused-appellants of murder under Section 302 IPC. 2. Whether the accused-appellants could be convicted of grievous hurt under Section 326 IPC based on the evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court applied the Supreme Court's decision in Chinniah Serrai v. State of Madras, which held that the oral testimony of witnesses can be classified into three categories: wholly reliable, wholly unreliable, and neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable. In the third category, the court must look for corroboration of material particulars by reliable testimony. 2. The court found that PW1's testimony was corroborated by medical evidence, which showed that the deceased had sustained grievous injuries to the abdomen and ear. The court also noted that the accused-appellants had not properly put contradictions to PW1's testimony.
Final Decision: The court set aside the conviction of the accused-appellants under Section 302 IPC for murder and convicted them of grievous hurt under Section 326 IPC. The court sentenced both accused-appellants to rigorous imprisonment for seven years for their individual acts.
( 1 ) ACCUSED Nos. 1 and 2 in SCNo. 17/95 which was pending on the file of IV Addl. Sessions Judge, Guntur are appellants in this appeal. Originally the appellants and four more accused were tried for two charges. The first charge against the accused was under Section 148 IPC. A11 the accused were acquitted of the said charge. The second charge against all the accused was under Section 302 IPC read with Section 149 IPC. The learned trial Judge acquitted the Accused Nos. 3 to 6, but he convicted A1 and A2 of the offences punishable under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to each of them to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 3,000. 00 and in default to suffer RI for 3 years. Thus, A1 and A2 are appellants in this appeal.
( 2 ) THE prosecution story can be briefly narrated as follows: That the deceased Challa Anjibabu was a rowdy-sheeter. In the month of October, 1990, he stabbed A2 and a case in Cr. No. 139 of 1990 was registered against him under Section 307 IPC read with Section 34 IPC along with other accused. A1 and A2 are brothers and therefore they bore grudge against the deceased.
( 3 ) IT is further case of the prosecution that PW1 was sister of the deceased. PW1 was given in marriage to one Mr. Venkateswarlu. The marriage was celebrated on 16-8-1991 and since then she has been residing with her husband at Anakammanagar, Guntur. It is further stated by the prosecution that four days prior to the incident, PW1 went to her parents house as she was suffering ill-health. On 16-3-1994, at about 7. 45 a. m. she accompanied her brother (deceased) in order to purchase vegetables from the shop which is situated near the house of A2. When the deceased and PW1 went to vegetable shop, A1 called the deceased and stabbed him on his stomach with a knife - M. O. No. 1 due to which the intestines of the deceased came out. A2 was also alleged to have hacked the deceased with an axe on the right side of the ear due to which the ear was chopped off. A4 was alleged to have stabbed the deceased on the left side of the stomach. Later, the other assailants attacked the deceased. PW1 could not identify them. On hearing the cries of PW1, the inmates of the nearby houses carne out. The deceased was shifted to Government General Hospital, Guntur in a rickshaw. PW1 had accompanied the deceased to the hospital. The deceased was examined by the Doctor and he was declared dead.
( 4 ) IT is further case of the prosecution that on 16-3-1994, at about 8. 30 a. m. , PW15, S. I. of Police Nagarampalem Law and Order Police Station received a phone call from the out-post Police Station, Guntur General Hospital. PW15 rushed and reached there by about 8. 45 a. m. He secured the presence of PW1 and recorded her statement. Ex. P1 is her statement. He returned to the Police Station and on the strength of Ex. P1 he registered a case in Cr. No. 20 of 1994 against the accused under Sections 147, 148 and 302 IPC read with Section 149 IPC. He issued the copies of first information to all the concerned, Ex. P13 is a copy of the FIR received by the Court of the Magistrate.
( 5 ) IT is further case of the prosecution that on 16-3-1994 at about 9. 50 a. m. , PWI6, Inspector of Police received information from PW15 about the murder of the deceased. He immediately proceeded to the scene of offence and reached there by 10. 15 a. m. and took up investigation. He examined the scene of offence in the presence of PW11 and prepared an observation report which appears on record as Ex. P8. He also prepared a rough sketch of scene of offence which is produced as Ex. P14. Thereafter, he proceeded to the hospital and held inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of PW12 and others. He recorded the statement of PWs. 1, 2 and 4 at the time of inquest.
( 6 ) IT is further case of the prosecution that PW16 made arrangements to send the dead body of the deceased to the hospital for autopsy. PWI4, Professor of Forensic Medicine, Guntur M
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
