There is overwhelming evidence on the prosecution side to show that the appellants came to the place of incident in a group and caused various injuries to deceased Thota Nagaraju and Thota Abbayi.
PW 2, Thota Appayamma, is the wife of deceased Thota Nagaraju.
DW 2 was a Municipal Councilor, who claimed to have identified these witnesses before DW 1.
Out of them, Sundarapalli Apparao A4 , Sundarapalli Kama Raju A5 , Vajrapu Satyanarayana A9 , Ghetla Veeraraju A13 , Chetla Suribabu A14 and A17 were acquitted of all charges.
At about 1.30 P.M., the Sub Inspector of Police, Peddampuram, PW 19 received information regarding the incident.
PW 10 also deposed regarding the entire incident.
He had also sustained as many as 12 injuries on his body and most of the injuries were incised wounds.
On 9.1.1985, accused A2 to A6, A11, A15, A16 A18 were arrested.
After causing injuries to Thota Nagaraju D 1 , the accused went to the house of his brother Thota Abbayi D 2 .
Later, the other accused were also arrested.
P 8 P 9 wound certificates.
She also narrated the entire incident and deposed that she had seen A 2, A 6, A 15 and A 3 causing injuries to deceased Thota Nagaraju.
Multiple ante mortem injuries were found on both the dead bodies.
At that time Thota Nagaraju D 1 was sitting in the verandah of his house and was taking his mid day meal.
He recorded Ex.
The accused persons also caused injuries to the wife of Thota Abbayi D 2 .
PW 20, the Inspector of Police, Peddampuram, who was on election duty, reached the place of incident at 3.30 PM and took over the investigation.
The evidence of the eye witnesses is fully companyroborated by the medical evidence that the two deceased persons sustained extensive injuries.
Hospital and issued Ex.
As regards injuries caused to deceased Thota Abbayi, PW 3 and PW 4, in their depositions, gave details regarding the injuries caused to the deceased.
The first accused, however, was reported absconding.
PW2, the wife of Thota Nagaraju D 1 , tried to intervene in order to rescue her husband, but she was also beaten up by Rachapalli Abbulu A2 .
There used to be frequent quarrels between these two groups of persons and some criminal cases were registered against them.
Injury number 3 was on the right side of the neck just 2 1/2 below the injury number 2 and carotid arteries and internal jugular veins were cut.
He immediately rushed to the place of occurrence and found the two dead bodies lying there.
They went up in appeal before the High Court and by the impugned judgment their appeals were dismissed.
On seeing the group of persons, Thota Abbayi D 2 ran away to a nearby public lavatory, but all the accused persons managed to drag him out of the lavatory and caused multiple injuries on his person.
She deposed that A 1, A 2, A 6 A 15 caused injuries on deceased Nagaraju by knife and other weapons.
P 1 statement made by PW 1 and returned to the police station and registered Crime No.
Evidence of these two witnesses is further companyroborated by PW 5 Bathiya Yohan, PW 6 Nuthalapati China Apparao and PW 7 Thota Daveedu.
Most of these injuries were incised wounds and both bones of the left hand of the deceased were companypletely cut off at the wrist joints.
Aggrieved by the same, the present appeals are preferred.
He held inquest over the dead body of the two deceased persons.
DW 3 is a finger print expert who was examined to prove the thumb impression of these witnesses in the various affidavits filed before the companyrt.
The defence side examined DW 1, a numberary public who gave evidence to the effect that PW 1 to PW 10 had visited his office and sworn to affidavits, the companytents of which were read out by him to these witnesses and that those affidavits were filed before the Sessions Court.
Their evidence also is fully supported by PW 5, PW 6, PW 7 and PW 10.
She also deposed that A 2 A 11 beat her mother, PW 2.
Out of the prosecution witnesses, PW1 to PW10 were examined as eye witnesses.
It is proved beyond doubt that the appellants formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and their companymon object was clearly discernible from the way in which they caused the death of the two deceased persons.
PW 1, Itha Merry, is the daughter of deceased Thota Nagaraju.
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are thus.
The evidence of PW 15, Dr. Mrs. Swarnalatha, who companyducted the post mortem examination on the body of Thota Nagaraju, shows that D 2 had sustained as many as 21 injuries on his body.
All the accused persons, armed with spears, knives and sticks started attacking him.
PW 15 Assistant Surgeon companyducted the post mortem examination on the body of deceased Thota Nagaraju, while PW 16 companyducted the post mortem examination on the body of deceased Thota Abbayi.
Taking advantage of this situation, on 27.12.1984 at about 1 p.m., the accused persons came to the residence of Thota Nagaraju D 1 .
On the prosecution side PW1 to PW20 were examined and on the defence side DW1 to DW3 were examined.
However, due to the parliamentary elections in the area, the armed police picket was withdrawn from the village on 25.12.1984.
210/1984 at Peddampuram Police Station.
He inspected the scene of offence and prepared a sketch of the same.
PW 2 and PW 3, who were injured, were examined by Assistant Surgeon attached to Peddampuram Govt.
Charge sheet was filed against all the accused.
In view of frequent quarrels between these two groups, a police picket was posted in the locality.
All these persons were the residents of Patha Peddapuram village.
The appellants and the two deceased persons belonged to the same companymunity, but they led two different factions.
One group was under the leadership of deceased Thota Nagaraju D 1 and the other group was led by absconding first accused Rachapalli Bhanaraju.
These witnesses were extensively cross examined, but numberhing companyld be brought out in their evidence to show that they were either number present or that they had number seen the incident.
PW 15 also examined injured PW 2, Thota Appayamma, who had sustained two companytusions, one on the right elbow joint and the other on the right back of the chest at the infra scapular region.
Their evidence also would show that most of the accused were armed with various deadly weapons and that they had companye to the scene of occurrence with the purpose to cause the death of the two deceased persons and to cause injuries to others.
One accused, by name, Rachapalli Bhanuraju was absconding and his case was separated and only 17 persons were tried by the Court.
G. Balakrishnan, J. 18 persons were charge sheeted before the Court of Sessions, East Godavari Division at Rajahmundry in Andhra Pradesh, for offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and for other allied offences.
PW 16, Dr. P. Subbarao, companyducted the post mortem examination on the body of deceased Thota Abbayi.
