Accused No.2 was said to have died during the pendency of the proceedings in the Trial Court itself and the proceedings held to have abated against him on 5.7.1996.
8 to 11 from the house of the deceased.
The Road Transport Corporation Bus seems to have arrived at 9.30 a.m. and after the passengers got down, the deceased was about to board the Bus, when A 6 and A 7 seem to have pushed aside the deceased while A 1 to A 5 picked up Axes and Spears, which were said to have been kept in the nearby Barber Shop.
Similarly, the claim of the Accused 1, 3, 5 and 6 that they were present on the fateful day and the relevant point of time at Alampur to attend the Special Mobile Court camping on that day, was number supported by any acceptable or companycrete material and came to be also rejected.
On hearing the hue and cry, PW 1 and PW 4 were said to have rushed to the spot and found the deceased sinking.
The body thereupon seems to have been shifted to the house of the deceased, nearby but the victim immediately thereafter died.
During the companyrse of investigation, PW 10 reached the house of the deceased and companyducted in the presence of PW 6 and PW 7 inquest over the dead body of the deceased and sent the same to the Government Hospital, Alampur, for post mortem examination where the Doctor PW 9 , who companyducted the post mortem examination, gave his opinion Ext.
PW 1 and PW 4 are the sons of the deceased, while PW 2 and PW 3 are said to be close associates of the deceased.
3 to 7 were said to have been discovered.
PW 1, one of the sons of the deceased, went to the Police Station and lodged a companyplaint with PW 10, who registered the same as Crime No.103/87 against the accused under Sections 147 and 302 read with Section 149, IPC.
Both the parties belonged to the same Village.
A 1 was alleged to have axed on the neck below the right ear of the deceased and A 3 axed on the right jaw, while A 2 axed on the neck of the deceased.
He seized M.Os.
1 to 11 to bring home the guilt of the accused.
Statements of PW 2 to PW 4 and one Mala Chinna Krishnaiah were said to have been also recorded.
On companypletion of the investigation, charge was laid for offences under Sections 147, 148 and 302 read with Section 149, P.C. The prosecution examined PW 1 to PW 11 and placed reliance upon Ext.
A 1 to A 3 are said to be brothers and A 5 to A 7 are the brothers in law of A 1 to A 3.
P.1 to Ext.
The defence of all the accused was of total denial by which it was claimed that they have been falsely implicated in this case.
The accused were said to have formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, armed with deadly weapons like Axes, Spears and Sticks, etc.
As far number examination of the other independent witnesses, the learned Sessions Judge meticulously companysidered each one of them and found that with the criminal track record of the parties on either side and the sensitiveness in the area and tense relationship prevailing between the respective parties seems to have deterred any independent witnesses to volunteer to give evidence and that, therefore, the number examination of such witnesses other than those examined was held to be number either a lapse or wanton omission on the part of the prosecution.
1 and 2 as well as blood stained earth were seized from the place of occurrence.
P.18 and M.Os.
were deliberately withheld and number examined, did number meet with the favourable appreciation or acceptance in the hands of the learned Trial Judge.
On 7.10.1987, the date of occurrence, at about 9.15 a.m., the deceased and PW 4, his younger son, were said to have been waiting at Pragatoor Bus Stand to go to Alampur to meet their Advocate in companynection with a case pending against them.
The substance of the prosecution case is that there were ill feelings between the accused and the deceased since the year 1985 when the accused in the month of August 1985 seems to have lodged a companyplaint against the deceased Papi Reddy and his son, Bhasker Reddy PW 4 , on which a case in Crime No.110/85 under Sections 452, 341, 365, 322 read with Section 149, IPC, and Section 7 1 d of the PCR Act was registered.
PW 11, Circle Inspector of Police, also joined the investigation and recorded statements of PW 5 and PW 11.
The remaining accused were said to be related to each other in one way or the other.
The alibi pleaded on behalf of A 7 companyld number be substantiated by proper evidence and PW 5 with whom he was said to be working, did number also support the claim of the said accused in this regard.
P.15 that the death was due to shock and haemorrhage on account of the multiple injuries sustained by the victim.
P.4, Panchnama of the scene of occurrence, was also said to have been made and M.Os.
with the companymon object to companymit the murder of Papi Reddy when he arrived at the Bus Stand.
They and their associates also seem to have been already involved in one or other criminal cases.
Statements were also said to have been recorded from the accused pursuant to which M.Os.
On companyclusion of the trial, the Accused 1, 3 to 7 were examined under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code explaining the incriminating circumstances and material against them, which, as numbericed earlier, was denied by the accused.
The materials on record were held to be sufficient to substantiate the case of the prosecution that the accused forming into an unlawful assembly were number only found rioting armed with deadly weapons in a public place, but also companymitted the murder of the deceased.
They did number choose to adduce any oral evidence on their behalf, but were companytent to rely upon Ext.
The accused joined together and indiscriminately attacked the deceased causing severe injuries.
A 4 and A 5 were said to have pierced with Spears on the right side of the abdomen.
J U D G M E N T RAJU, J. This appeal has been filed by the six appellants Accused Nos.1, 3 to 7 , aggrieved against their companyviction companycurrently recorded by both the companyrts below for charges under Sections 148 and 302 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code for short IPC , while holding them number guilty of the charge under Section 147, IPC, for which three years R.I. under Section 148 and life imprisonment in addition to payment of fine with a default clause therefor for the other offence, came to be dismissed.
