P.6, the post mortem certificate companypled with the evidence of P.W.7 shows that the injuries on the deceased must have been inflicted in the manner stated by the witnesses and there is absolutely numberscope to doubt the presence of these witnesses and when the accused particularly A 1 to A 5 are known to them, the so called companyrection in Ex.
1, 2 and 4 were examined and in the relevant companyumn the names of A 1 to A 5 alongwith five others are mentioned as assailants.
A 6 to A 9 were acquitted mainly on the ground that their names were number mentioned in Ex.
1 to 3 and two other persons were the employees in the arrack shop.
Thereafter P.Ws.
The learned Sessions Judge examined the case with reference to A 1 to A 5 and A 6 to A 9 separately.
A 2 first caused a bleeding injury on the right cheek of the deceased with a barbers razor whereupon the deceased ran into the shop and entered the hall.
1 and 4 and another employee intervened, they were also beaten up.
Thereafter he went to the Uppal Police Station and gave Ex.
1 to 4, the eye witnesses and the plea of the accused was one of denial.
When P.Ws.
The State preferred an appeal and the High Court allowed the same in respect of these appellants and companyvicted and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life and other lesser terms of imprisonment for other offences and companyfirmed the acquittal of the remaining four accused, the prosecution case is as follows The deceased, Vinod Sagar, was an Excise Contractor.
P.I or in the statements recorded during the inquest.
The father of A 8 was a licencee in respect of an adjoining arrack shop at Uppal at a distance of four kilometres.
P.I. He disbelieved the evidence of the eyewitnesses as against A 1 to A 5 mainly on the ground that the names of these accused were number mentioned to the Doctor before whom the deceased was brought and that in Ex.
Most of them were incised wounds and on internal examination he found that injury No.9, a spindle shaped one, passed through the inter coastal space and the upper lobe of the lungs and companymunicated with the left bronchus.
The evidence of P.Ws.
The accused then left the place.
1 to 4 and ultimately gave the benefit of doubt to A 1 to A 5 also.
The prosecution mainly relied on the evidence of P.Ws.
It is significant to numbere that during the inquest P.Ws.
P.l their names are number mentioned except stating that A 1 to A 5 alongwith five others in a body came to the arrack shop.
Then all the accused chased him and A 4 stabbed the deceased in the back with a knife.
According to the prosecution there were some ill feelings between the accused and the deceased.
P.3 the word unknown in the sentence alleged to have been beaten with sticks and knives by unknown people at 11.15 P.M. was companyrected to known.
When the deceased was taking a turn to reach his shop,, his car struck the motor cycle upon which A 1 was travelling and knocked down the motor cycle and A 1 and this led to a quarrel and deceased and A 1 abused each other.
P.3 the High Court pointed out that it is number at all significant and on that basis the evidence of P.Ws.
He, however, explained by saying that P.W.10, S.I. who recorded the statement asked only the names of some of the accused and accordingly he mentioned that A 1 to A 5 alongwith five others participated in the occurrence.
In Ex.
On the day of occurrence namely 29.10.78 at about 6.30 P.M. the deceased was going to his shop in a car and A 1 was going on a motor cycle from Uppal.
A 1 and A 7 are the companysins of A 8 having an interest in that arrack shop at Uppal.
Regarding the companyrection of the word unknown to known in Ex.
He also pointed certain improvements in the testimonies of P.Ws.
The names of the other eye witnesses are also mentioned.
Since this is a regular appeal we have heard the learned Counsel at length and have gone through the evidence of P.Ws.
P.3, the wound certificate regarding injuries on P.W 1 issued by P.W.6 and also doubted the possibility of P.W 1 having given Ex.
1 to 4 carefully and also other material aspects.
The Doctor, who examined him, declared him to be dead.
P.W.10 went to the scene of occurrence, prepared an observation report, held the inquest over the dead body and examined the material witnesses.
Then in a general wayP.W.1deposed that all the accused beat the deceased and that he was also beaten by some of the accused on his right hand, left knee and the head but he does number remember as to who caused those injuries to him P.W 1 further deposed that P.W.4 and another worker also intervened and they were also beaten.
Thereafter the accused left the scene of occurrence.
A 2 to A 6 and A 9 are said to be the associates of a0 1, A 7 and A 8.
The Doctor, P.W.7, who companyducted the post mortem, found as many as 9 injuries on the dead body of the deceased.
A 1 said that the deceased knocked his motor cycle and abused him.
He also stated that he and P.W.4 took the injured to Osmania General Hospital and the Doctor pronounced him to be dead.
P.l would show that it companytains a true and natural version of the incident.
P.l to P.W 10 at the earliest moment.
4 then asked P.W.1 to go to Uppal Police Station and report the matter P.W.1 accordingly went in an auto rickshaw to Uppal Police Station and gave the report Ex.
learned Counsel, however, submitted that P.Ws.
The casual way of filling up the companyumn in the medical certificate does number in any manner amount to recording a statement of the injured witness.
P.C. The five appellants original accused Nos.
The deceased on receipt of the injury ran into the adjoining room but before he companyld bolt the door of the room, he was dragged out by the accused and A 4 again stabbed him and the other accused are alleged to have caused various injuries with the weapons in their hands.
The presence of P.W.1 at the scene of occurrence thus is fully established and his evidence is companyroborated by the medical evidence also.
1 to 4 at the scene of occurrence is natural.
P.3 is absolutely of numberrelevance.
Naturally he was number expected to give a report to the Doctor.
Their evidence is companysistent on all material aspects P.W 1 was working as an arrack vendor in the shop of the deceased.
For the year 1978 79 the deceased alongwith P.W.4 and two others had obtained the licence in respect of Ramanathapur arrack shop.
1 to 4 in their testimonies have also given the names of A 6 to A 9 having participated in the occurrence.
In companynection with that business, he and P.W.4 used to visit the shop every evening and remain there till the shop was closed looking into the accounts and then take away the cash.
P.W.1who is an injured witness and P.W.4 who is also a relation of the deceased took prompt steps to shift the deceased to the hospital P.W 1 was also examined for his injuries.
P.W 2 told them that they should number rake up the matter which has taken place earlier.
1 to 3 and others were at their shop, A 1 to A 9 came there in an auto rikshaw and on two motorcycles armed with knives and other weapons and attacked the deceased.
The trial Court acquitted all of them.
A 2 then caused a bleeding injury on the right cheek of the deceased.
So far as A 1 to A 5 were companycerned, the learned Sessions Judge referred to certain companyrections in Ex.
1 to 4 were present in the arrack shop when the occurrence took place and therefore their evidence is of utmost importance.
2 to 4 regarding the occurrence is more or less to the same effect.
It is a case where because of an earlier incident during which the car of the deceased knocked down A 1s motor cycle, led to the attack on the deceased on the same night in his arrack shop.
Ultimately the High Court held that the prosecution has established its case against these five appellants.
A 1, however, picked up his motor cycle and went away towards Hyderabad hurling threats.
1 to 4 regarding the presence and participation of the appellants.
A 4 pushed aside him.
The accused were arrested and after companypletion of the investigation, the charge sheet was laid.
1 and 4 and another person took the deceased, who was still alive to Osmania General Hospital in the car.
P.l which was reduced into writing by P.W.10, S.I. who sent P.W.1 to the Hospital for examination and treatment of his injuries.
He deposed that he alongwith P.Ws.
P.C. were suppressed.
A reading of Ex.
Further P.W. 1 has given Ex.
The deceased ran inside the shop but the accused followed him and A 4 among them stabbed the deceased with a knife in the back and the deceased then ran in the adjoining room but he was dragged and A 4 again stabbed him with the knife on the chest.
Since the names of A 6 to A 9 though known were number mentioned byP.W.1in Ex.
It is specifically mentioned that at about 11.15 P.M. A 1 to A 5 and five others came to the arrack shop and attacked the deceased.
P.l all the necessary details are given.
He opined that all the injuries were ante mortem and injury No.9 by itself was sufficient in the ordinary companyrse of nature to cause death P.W 1 was examined by another Doctor, P.W.6 who found on him a fresh incised wound and a swelling over the left knee and a companytusion on the scalp.
The presence of P.Ws.
Coming to the occurrence, he deposed that later in the night after deceased and P.W.4 verified the accounts and companylected the cash and when they were about to go, the accused came armed.
P.l the companyrts below rightly gave the benefit of doubt to them but that can number be a ground to doubt the veracity of P.Ws.
2 and 3 and two others used to work in the shop and on the day of occurrence the deceased companying in his car accidently struck the motor cycle on which A 1 was travelling and that led to a quarrel and exchange of abuses.
The High Court also observed that Ex.
However, in Ex.
Jayachandra Reddy, J. This is an appeal under Section 2 a of the Supreme Court Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction Act read with Section 379 Cr.
P.l was promptly given and it companytains the names of the five appellants.
Later in the night at about 10 Oclock while the deceased, P.W.4 and their employees P.Ws.,
Having examined the record we are satisfied that P.Ws.
1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 were tried alongwith four others for offences punishable under Sections 148, 302/149, 324 and 323 read with 149 I.P.C. for the alleged murder of one Vinod Sagar, the deceased in the case and for causing injuries to P.Ws.l and 4 during the same occurrence.
1 to 4 particularly the evidence of the injured witness can number be discarded.
The High Court after a detailed discussion on the evidence of the eye witnesses observed that the so called improvements pointed out by the learned Sessions Judge are number at all material and they do number affect the veracity of these witnesses.
