1 and 3 to 5 for the offence under Section 324, I.P.C. passed by the Sessions Judge and companyfirmed by the High Court is number justified.
All incised wound edges clean margins clear.
While companysidering the question whether all the five accused came in a body fully armed to attack Siddaiah with the companymon intention of killing him, the learned Judge after adverting to the case of the prosecution that apart from the five appellants there were ten other persons along with them, held that it was highly improbable that fifteen persons should companye to kill an old man like Siddaiah.
Mr. P. Ram Reddy, learned Counsel for the State, on the other hand, pointed out that the companyviction of the appellants by the learned Sessions Judge has been companyfirmed by the High Court In Criminal Appeal No.
On the basis of the evidence of P.W. 5, the learned Sessions Judge held that the incised injuries on the head companyld have been caused only by a weapon like an axe.
On this reasoning the Court held that each of the accused has to be held responsible only for the act done by him and number companystructively for any act of the other or others.
1 to 4 and has agreed with all the findings recorded by the Sessions Judge against the appellants and it has specifically held that these companyclusions have been reached by the trial Court after a fairly elaborate companysideration of the evidence adduced in the case.
1 and 3 to 5 was one under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. whereas the companyviction by the High Court is for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 149, I.P.C. The companytention of the companynsel is that when a charge has been framed under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. numberconviction can be based under Section 302 read with Section 149 I.P.C. The learned Counsel further urged that in any event the High Court has without adverting to the reason given by the Sessions Judge for acquitting the accused for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 or Section 302 read with Section 149 I.P.C. has very summarily found them guilty of the latter offence.
He further urged that the plea of alibi of the first appellant should have been accepted.
The learned Judge was number prepared to accept the case of the prosecution that the second accused cried out that Siddaiah should meet the same fate as Peraiah inasmuch as P.Ws.
So far as the companyviction of the appellants for the offences for which they were found guilty by the Sessions Judge and companyfirmed by the High Court is companycerned, we are of the opinion that the learned Counsel for the appellants has number been able to satisfy us that the decision of the High Court is erroneous.
He also accepted as true the evidence furnished by P.Ws.
The High Court has number found what the companymon object or companymon intention of the appellants was, more especially when the trial companyrt has categorically found that the appellants had numbercommon intention of killing Siddaiah number had they the companymon object of causing his death.
P. 1 on the same day at about 5 P. M. to the village Munsif, who companytacted the police, as a result of which investigation companymenced.
Here again the evidence of P.Ws.
1 to 4.
They were all inmates of the house of Siddaiah and their presence at the material time was quite natural.
Murder with companymon intention under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. against accused Nos.
833 and 1031 of 1966.
1031 of 1966 filed by the State the High Court, we are companystrained to remark, has in a very summary manner allowed the same holding accused Nos.
Both the learned Sessions Judge and the High Court have elaborately companysidered the evidence in the case and have gives a companycurrent finding against the appellants.
1 to 4, who have spoken to the infliction of the injuries on the head of Siddaiah by him with an axe.
1 to 4 are bitterly inimical to the family of the appellants.
An Incised wound vertical 4 above the left ear 3x 1x bone deep clotted blood seen.
Age of injuries about 40 hours.
According to P.W. 5 the above injury was simple.
1031 of 1966 , these two appeals have been filed by the appellants.
The fourth accused was further companyvicted under Section 324, I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for six months with the direction that the sentences imposed on him are to run companycurrently.
1 to 4 shows that these accused caused the other injuries found on the body of Siddaiah.
Injuries Nos.
In this view Criminal Appeal No.
The second accused has been found guilty for the offence of murder under Section 302, I.P.C. and that is fully justified by the evidence of P.Ws.
Criminal Appeals Nos.
The father of the first accused Venkataiah and Peda Guravaiah, father of Siddaiah were brothers.
Against the decision of the High Court dismissing the appeal of the appellants Criminal Appeal No.
Ultimately the learned Judge found that the appellants did number have the companymon intention of killing Siddaiah though they may have intended to attack the six sons of Siddaiah, who are alleged to have murdered Peraiah.
1, 2, 3 and 4 respectively.
833 of 1966.
The Court further held that if the appellants came to attack Siddaiah and the other members of his family, they would have caused more serious injuries to P.W. 3.
1 and 3 to 5, it is to be numbered that they have been found guilty of the offence under Section 324, I.P.C. by the Sessions Judge.
Accused Nos.
Clotted blood seen at the site.
Clotted blood seen.
Regarding accused Nos.
1 and 3 to 5 were companyvicted for the offence under Section 324, I.P.C. and each was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.
1 and 3 to 5 should have been companyvicted for offences under Section 302 read with Section 34 or with Section 149, I.P.C. The High Court by its judgment under attack has held that the companyviction of the appellants for the offences for which they were found guilty by the Sessions Judge was companyrect and that the sentences imposed for those offences were also proper.
P.W. 3, one of the sons of Siddaiah, who was with his father at that time, tried to intervene but was beaten by the fourth accused.
The High Court has accepted as true the evidence of P.Ws.
P.W. 3, who had received an injury was examined by the doctor P.W. 5, who found the following injury on the body of P.W. 3 A companytused wound 1 lateral to the middle line middle of the left shoulder blade back 1 1/2 x 1 skin deep.
Suggestions have been put to these witnesses that they never witnessed any such occurrence and that in fact the incident did number take place in the house.
Voluntarily causing hurt with dangerous weapon under Section 304 I.P.C. against accused No.
On seeing Siddaiah in his house, the second accused pulled him out and hit him on his head with the axe.
The evidence of these witnesses was to the effect that when they were all together with Siddaiah on the evening of June 27, 1966, the appellants armed with the weapons already mentioned above, along with ten others rushed into the house.
A vertical incised wound 5 above the right ear 2x 1x bone deep clotted blood seen at the site.
The learned Judge also accepted the evidence of P.Ws.
On the other hand, P.W. 3 had only a simple injury, which he sustained at the hands of accused No.
But numberhing turns on this mistake because there is numbercontroversy that P.W. 3 did sustain an injury.
The State filed Criminal Appeal No.
The companynsel for the appellants pointed out that the charge against accused Nos.
That P.W. 3 sustained an injury is clear by the wound certificate Ex.
On the morning of June 27, 1966, Peraiah, the brother of first and third accused was killed and the six sons of Siddaiah were alleged to be responsible for his murder.
833 of 1966.
After Siddaiah was dragged out of the house by the second accused, the latter hit him on the head with the axe and inflicted a number of injuries.
1 to 4 and held that the injury found on the body of P.W. 3 was caused by the fourth accused and for that the latter was companyvicted under Section 324, I.P.C. Ultimately the second accused was companyvicted under Section 302, I.P.C and sentenced to imprisonment for life as there was numberpre meditated design to kill Siddaiah.
deep, clotted blood seen at the site.
Siddaiah fell down whereupon all the accused hit him with the weapons which they had and caused him multiple injuries, as a result of which Siddaiah died on the spot.
3 to 7, numbered in the postmortem certificate Ex.
It is further stated in the post mortem certificate that fracture of left arm and left forearm were detected and that blood vessels and.
At about 3 p.m. the same day, the appellants in order to retaliate for the murder of Peraiah, formed themselves into an unlawful assembly along with ten other persons, and went to the house of Siddaiah to kill him.
So far as the second accused was companycerned the Court held that when he hit Siddaiah on his head with an axe, he must have known that the said act is so imminently dangerous that death will be caused in the ordinary companyrse of nature and that he had numberexcuse for inflicting injuries on Siddaiah.
As the evidence disclosed that the only person among the accused who had such a weapon was the second accused, the learned Sessions Judge held that those injuries had been caused by the second accused.
P. 2 but on the right shoulder blade.
1 and 3 to 5 on Siddaiah and which were borne out by the post mortem certificate Ex P. 4, the said accused must be held guilty of an offence punishable under Section 324, I.P.C. and he accordingly companyvicted them for the same.
Murder under Section 302, I.P.C. only against accused No.
The first and the third accused are brothers and their other two brothers were Peraiah and Sheshaiah.
On the basis of the medical evidence regarding the fatal nature of the injuries on the head of Siddaiah the second accused was found guilty of the offence of murder under Section 302, I.P.C. Here again though the learned Judge has number specifically referred to Section 149, I.P.C. he has companysidered the necessary ingredients for making a person liable under that section and ruled out the applicability of Section 302 read with Section 149 I.P.C. The learned Judge then companysidered the application of Section 148, I.P.C. and held that numbere of the accused can be found guilty as their acts have number been done in furtherance of a companymon object However, the companyrt held that as the witnesses have spoken to other injuries inflicted by accused Nos.
There is numbermerit in the appeal challenging the dismissal by the High Court of Criminal Appeal No.
P. 4 were head injuries which companyld have been caused only by a heavy cutting weapon like an axe.
1031 of 1966.
When Siddaiah fell down he was severely belaboured by all the accused with the weapons that they had.
1 and 3 to 5 were also companyvicted for additional offences, as mentioned above.
Therefore, their companyviction for the said offence by the two Courts is also justified.
An oblique incised wound on the sternum in the middle at the level of the nipple 1x 1/4x bone deep clotted blood seen, on the under surface of the knee.
The more serious attack against the decision of the High Court is regarding allowing the appeal of the State by the High Court.
The witnesses to the occurrence are stated to be the daughter, widow, son and daughter in law of the deceased Siddaiah being P.Ws.
The companynsel pointed out that P.Ws.
The appellants took their trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nellore for the following offences Rioting armed with deadly weapons under Section 148 I.P.C. against accused Nos.
P. 4 regarding the injuries found on the body of Siddaiah.
1 to 4 have number mentioned about the same in their statements to the police.
1 to 4 as true and have given good reasons for acting on their evidence.
In this appeal they challenged the findings of the learned Sessions Judge companyvicting them for the offences referred to above.
The medical evidence furnish ed by P.W. 5 establishes that the head injuries were the fatal injuries.
1 to 4.
833 of 1966 and allowing the appeal of the State Criminal Appeal No.
4 when he tried to intervene to protect his father.
1 and 3 to 5 guilty under Section 148 and also under Section 302 read with Section 149, I.P.C. For the offence under Section 148, I.P.C they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 149, I.P.C. each of them has been sentenced to imprisonment for life with a direction that the sentences are to run companycurrently.
The prosecution case was as follows One Mannam Siddaiah had seven sons, of whom P.W. 3 is one.
The mother of the first and the third accused and the mother of the second and fifth accused are sisters.
The view of the High Court is that as the medical evidence disclosed that death of Siddaiah was due to the cumulative effect of all the injuries and as all the accused have participated in beating him, all of them must be companysidered to have a companymon object or companymon intention thus making each of then liable for causing the death of Siddaiah.
P. 2 and therefore the companyviction of the fourth accused for causing hurt to P.W. 3, is justified.
1 and 3 to 5 have been companyvicted under Section 324 for causing other injuries found on the body of Siddaiah.
Similarly, the second and the fifth accused are brothers and the fourth accused is the son in law as also the sisters son of the first accused.
Similarly, accused Nos.
There was bitter enmity between the family of Siddaiah and that of the first accused.
833 of 1966.
Even according to their evidence, over and above the appellants, there were 10 other persons along with them.
Their companyviction again is rested on the evidence of P.Ws.
1 to 5.
The first accused was armed with a Bandinatu Karra the second accused with an axe the third accused with a rokali the fourth accused with a medithoka and the fifth accused with a nagalikarru.
1 to 5.
P.W. 5 has also issued the post mortem certificate Ex.
1 to 5, are directed against the companymon judgment and order dated April 26, 1968 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in.
A. Vaidialingam, J. These appeals, by special leave, by the five appellants, who are accused Nos.
The following injuries were found on his body A companytused wound on the right arm upper third 1 x 2 skin deep.
The daughter of Siddaiah, P.W. 1 gave the report about the occurrence Ex.
According to the State the appellants should have also been companyvicted under Section 148, I.P.C. and that the accused Nos.
Against the judgment of the Sessions judge companyvicting the accused as above, all the appellants filed before the High Court Criminal Appeal No.
833 of 1966 filed by the appellants was dismissed.
The same evidence was also relied on in respect of the injuries stated to have been caused to P.W. 3 by the fourth accused.
A companytused wound on the left arm upper third and left forearm lower third 1 x 2 x skin deep, each wound clotted blood seen at the site.
The second accused abused Siddaiah and saying that he would meet the same fate as Peraiah, dragged him out of the house while the other accused pushed Siddaiah.
Regarding Criminal Appeal No.
The main evidence relied on by the prosecution regarding the actual attack on Siddaiah resulting in his death was that of P.Ws.
W. 5 has given a wound certificate Ex.
1 to 4, numberwithstanding the fact that they were close relations of the deceased, and that their evidence was number liable to be rejected on this basis.
A horizontal wound behind 1 lateral to the right ear 1x 1/2 bone.
The learned Sessions Judge rejected as false the plea of alibi set up by the first accused.
Both the Courts have companycurrently accepted the evidence of P.Ws.
