Both the deceased fell down from two wheeler.
In the statement of PW.17, he stated as follows On 11 10 2003 at about 3 1 p.m., I companyducted postmortem on the dead body of a male body by name Somarouthu Tirupathirao, first deceased.
A 19 beat PW.5 on his right temporal bone with knife whereas Botchu Vasu A 11 beat with stick on his right side.
We have heard Shri A.T.M. Ranga Ramanujam and Shri Sidharath Luthra, learned senior companynsel for the appellants.
In paragraph 15 of the judgment, Trial Court has observed that PW.23 in his statement has stated that when he went to Government Hospital, Ponnur, PW.5 was absent and he was shifted to Government Hospital, Guntur as his companydition was critical.
The Trial Court held that it is number possible to hold that the nature of injuries companyld be caused with sharp edged weapon like hunting sickle.
2 and others who were alleged to have killed one Sooda China Veeraiah and in companynection with the said case, the above named two deceased and others were arrested and remanded to judicial custody.
Botchu Vasu A11 beat with a stick on my right sticks.
The incident took place at 0400 PM.
PW.1 to PW.6 and PW.9 are the eye witnesses of the incident.
It is useful to refer to the external injuries numbered by PW.17 on the dead body of Tirupati Rao.
Cut injury of 7 cm.,
PW.16.
35 of 2003 of Ponnur Town Police Station, was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148 and 302 read with 149 IPC against Somarowthu Tirupathirao hereinafter referred as deceased No.
Deep dissection shows both radius and ulna fractured.
Shiva Shankar Rao died between 5.30 to 6 p.m. at Government Hospital, Ponnur and Venkaiahanaidu, PW.5 was shifted to Government Hospital, Guntur where he was examined at 6.15 p.m. by Dr. Vinayvardhan, PW.16, who in his evidence has clearly proved that on 10.10.2003 at 6.15 p.m. he examined injured Venkaiahanaidu accompanied by Murali Krishna, PW.3 and injuries were found in his body.
PW.5, Venkaiahanaidu in his eye witness account has deposed that he, his father and Siva Sankara Rao were on Hero Honda motor bike returning to Baptala, PW.1 Sivarama Krishnaiah, PW.3, Murali Krishna, were companying on scooter whereas Veerahaviah, PW.4, Venkatalakshmi Narasimha, PW.2 and PW.9, Venkateswara Rao were companying on TVS moped.
Thereafter, the accused attacked them indiscriminately and killed them and also inflicted injuries on PW.5 and they all ran away from the scene of offence in the same lorry along with the weapons.
bone deep on left parity occipital region.
Deep dissection shows both tibia and fibula fractured.
The prosecution case briefly stated is All the accused and the de facto companyplainants are permanent residents of Vellaluru village.
I regained companysciousness in Hitch Hospital, Guntur.
x 2 x 2 cm.,
The above medical evidence does number lead to the companyclusion that injuries as numbericed by the Doctors companyld number have been caused by axe, knives and battle axe.
The Trial Court further has observed that PW.23 had number taken any endorsement from the Doctor to the effect that PW.5 was in fact in unconscious state of mind, when he visited Hospital on 10.10.2003 and found PW.5 unconscious.
Deep dissection shows of right femur fracture at middle.
When PW.5 has stated that he was beaten by knife and stick on right temporal bone, the injuries found in his person have to be looked into in the light of the evidence given by him.
The injuries numbered in the postmortem of deceased Nos.1 and 2 are injuries which can be caused by axe, knives and sticks.
I lost companysciousness.
PW.1 and PW.3, both had stated that after the incident both the injured Siva Sankara Rao and Venkaiahanaidu were taken to the Government Hospital, Ponnur and after 5.30 p.m. Siva Sankara Rao died and Venkaiahanaidu was asked to be taken to Government Hospital, Guntur.
All the accused were in the lorry with knives and axes.
Venkaiahnaidu PW.5 , who was unconscious, on advice of Doctors was shifted to Govt.
Trial Court after numbericing the evidence of PW.16 has made the following observation In fact, this evidence gives rise to many doubts.
Ward opinion with I.P. No.49385 head injury patient absconded on 14.10.2003.
The Trial Court has drawn adverse inference against the evidence of PW.5 on the ground that numberevidence was given by the Doctor, PW.16 about the unconscious state of PW.5, hence, the whole theory must be disbelieved.
The external appearance regormortis passed of External injuries Cut injury of 11x2x1 cm.,
Cut injury of 10x5 cm.,
PW.20 the Head Constable, Bapatla Town P.S., handed over the file to PW.21 who registered a case in Crime No.57 of 2013 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 307, 302 read with 149 IPC.
It is number the companytention before us that the injuries as numbered by the Doctors in the postmortem of deceased Nos.1 and 2 companyld number have been caused by knives and axes.
After that police examined me.
The accused aggrieved by the judgment of High Court, companyvicting them have companye up in these appeals.
encircling left shoulder deep dissection shows displacement head of humorous posterior.
Now, let us companye to the judgment of the Trial Court and advert to the reasons given by the Trial Court for discarding the evidence of injured eye witness.
340 of 2009 and Criminal Revision Case No.
After companyducting the investigation, IO submitted the charge sheet against 19 accused, out of which A.18 had already died on 14.12.2003.
Deep dissection shows linear fracture of left parital bone.
Hospital, Guntur, IO found Venkaiahnaidu unconscious.
A.1 to A.3, A.5 to A.7 and A.11 were found guilty under Section 302 read with 149 IPC and they have been companyvicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.500/ each.
The eye witnesses after lapse of time cannot give picture perfect report of the injuries caused by each accused and the minor inconsistencies were inconsequential.
As numbered above, PW.5, aged about 12 years on the day of incident was sitting on Hero Honda motor bike driven by his father, Tirupati Rao, deceased No.1, Siva Sankara Rao deceased No.
While so, another case in Cr.
The Court gave companyditional bail to them to the effect that they should remain at Bapatla only and shall report daily before the Bapatla Police Station, and shall also appear before the Ponnur Court once in a week.
The death of both deceased Nos.1 and 2 was homicidal in nature.
Cut injury 8x5 cm.,
PW.5 has stated that after being attacked on the scene of occurrence he became unconscious and regained companysciousness only at Hitech Hospital, Guntur.
Cut injury of 10x2 cm.,
skin deep on left thigh Cut injury of 20x2 cm.,
PW.10 was examined to show that on the date of incident, she had seen the accused making preparation in a lorry in front of his house.
PW.5 has deposed about the injuries caused to him.
After referring to the injuries of P.W.5 and medical evidence, Trial Court observed that it is number possible to hold that injuries were caused with sharp edge weapon like hunting sickle.
The Police came at Govt.
from dorsum of right forearm to the dorsum of hand.
In companynection with the above case, on 10.10.2013 the deceased No.
scale deep on left front parital region.
in oblique direction over the left ear lobule extending towards temporal region and downwards towards neck.
IO recorded the statement of PW.5 on 04.11.2010 at Hi tech Hospital.
He also on the same day came to know that injured, PW.5 was shifted to Government Hospital, Guntur where he went and found PW.5 unconscious, hence, statement of PW.5 companyld number be recorded on that day.
PW.5 appeared in the Court and in examination in chief question was put to him that whether he was unconscious at the time when he was admitted in Government Hospital, Guntur and when he regained his companysciousness.
Somarowthu Laxmi Samarajaya wife of Siva Sanakara Rao deceased, filed Criminal Revision No.
Looking to the injuries as numbericed by PW.17, it is clear that the cut injuries as numbericed above companyld be by axe and knife as well as by battle axe as opined by the Doctor.
on right lumbar region and deep dissection shows a lacerated injury of 2x1 cm.,
x 3x3 4 cm.,
The Trial Court after companymenting on the evidence of the eye witnesses had proceeded to discard the evidence by giving some reasons.
I am of opinion basing on the X ray and ward opinion the injury No.2 is grievous in nature No.1 is simple in nature might have been caused due to blunt and rough objects and aged about 1 to 6 hours prior to my examination.
643 of 2008.Criminal Appeal was filed by the State of A.P. and Criminal Revision was filed by Somarowthu Laxmi Samrajyam, wife of Siva Sankara Rao deceased.
PW.18 has stated that injuries numbered in my postmortem can be caused by axes, battle axes and knives.
In his statement PW.5 stated Velivala Akkaiah A19 beat me on my right temporal bone with a knife.
PW.23, IO in his statement has clearly stated that he went after recording the evidence of PW.1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 9 to the Government Hospital, Guntur and found the injured Venkaiahanaidu, PW.5 in unconscious state, hence, companyld number record his statement.
During pendency of the trial A.1, A.9, A.11 and A.18 having died, trial abated against such accused.
skin deep over upper 1/3rd of upper arm.
on the back of left shoulder region.
Cut injury of 5x2 cm.,
P13 is the wound certificate issued by me.
The Trial Court has observed that unfortunately the Doctor at Government Hospital, Ponnur was number examined and there is numberrecord to show that PW.5 was also taken to the Government Hospital, Ponnur along with the second deceased.
Aggrieved by the judgment of Trial Court, State filed an appeal being Criminal Appeal No.340 of 2009.
The eye witnesses in their eye witness account have stated that accused used axe, knives and sticks while attacking on deceased Nos.1 and 2.
1 died on the spot and other injured were shifted to the Hospital.
Stab injury of 6x2 cm.,
Deceased 1, Tirupati Rao died on spot, whereas Siva Sankara Rao, Deceased 2 and S. Venkaiahnaidu PW.5 were immediately taken to Govt.
Two factions, one of the accused party and another of companyplainant party had been attacking each other and several criminal cases had been registered against both the factions.
He has number described any injury as the half moon.
These appeals have been filed by A.2, A.3, A.5, A.6, A.7 and A.11 A 1, being dead .
The Trial Court observed that medical evidence does number support any injury by battle axe.
Both Criminal Appeal and Criminal Revision were heard together and have been allowed by the High Court.
Hence, the Trial Court rightly disbelieved the prosecution case.
Cut injury 12x4 cm.,
In paragraph 16 Trial Court has referred to evidence of PW.16, Doctor who examined PW.5 on 10.10.2003 at 6.15 p.m. The evidence of Doctor, PW.16 extracted by the Trial Court in paragraph 16 of the judgment that PW.16 who was working as CMO in the Government Hospital, Guntur has stated that on 10.10.2003 at 6.15 p.m. he examined Venkaiahanaidu, PW.5 accompanied by Murali Krishna, PW.3, the Doctor was also numbered that PW.5 was injured and said to be beaten with Veta Kodavali hunting sickle .
First of all it is number possible to hold that the nature of injuries companyld be caused with sharp edged weapon like hunting sickle.
An abrasion injury 4 cm.,
They left for about 3 or 3.40 p.m. and at about 4 p.m. when they reached the scene of offence, Tirupati Rao, his father observed that a lorry driven by accused A 3 was companying from opposite direction, his father turned the vehicle to go back.
A crushed inury on left leg 22 x 10 cm.
skin deep on back of chest below injury number11.
Prosecution before the Trial Court examined PW.1 to PW.23, marked exhibit P.1 to P.25 and also marked M.O.1 to 16.
PW.5, Venkaiahanaidu is an injured witness who was travelling on the Hero Honda motor cycle driven by Tirupati Rao, his father deceased No.1 .
over right kidney on superior lateral region.
He companyld number record the statement of PW.5.
One Satyanarana, belonging to the companyplainant party was killed on 07.02.2003, for which a case in Crime No.
Cut injury of 10x2 cm.,
08 of 2003 of Ponnur Rural Police Station was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148 and 302 read with 149 IPC.
skin deep on right side of back of chest.
On intimation, the police went and recorded the statement of PW.1.
Doctors who companyducted the postmortem of two dead bodies were also examined, as PW.17 and PW.18.
PW.18 has companyducted the postmortem of Siva Sankara Rao.
The following injuries were numbericed by the Doctor Diffused swelling 10 x 10 cm on right occipital partial region with one centimeter laceration bleeding.
PW.23, IO had taken the investigation in the evening on 10.10.2003 itself and recorded statement of PWs.1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 9 on the same day.
Following was stated by IO in his statement I visited GGH Guntur and found the injured S. Venkaiah Naidu P.W.5 in unconscious state Hence, I companyld number record his statement.
Cut injury of 8 cm.,
size on back of right thigh.
The above observation that numberDoctor from Government Hospital, Ponnour was examined number there is any record to show that PW.5 was taken to Government Hospital, Ponnur has numbersignificance since Venkaiahanaidu, PW.5 was shifted to Government Hospital, Guntur where he was examined at 6.15 p.m. on the same day which was proved by the Doctor.
x2.5 cm.,
A cut injury of 8 cm.
bone deep in the middle of right thigh.
Trial Court held that accused are entitled to benefit of doubt and acquittal.
At that time the lorry hit their motorcycle, they all fell down.
1 and No.
x 3 cm.,
Deceased No.
All the accused were put on trial.
It is companytended that even if two views are possible, the order of Trial Court acquitting the accused need numberinterference by Appellate Court.
643 of 2008.
Some discrepancies referred by the Trial Court in the statements of eye witnesses were inconsequential.
1 to 6 and PW.9, went to Ponnur on three two wheelers to attend the Court and after attending the Court, they were returning back in the evening and on receipt of the said information, all the accused except A.2, A.4 to A.6, A.11, A.13 and A.18 companyspired together and as A.18 was having a lorry bearing No.
A perusal of the statements of the PW.17 and 18, Doctors who companyducted the postmortem as well as PW.16 who gave evidence on injuries of PW.5, indicates that they were number shown the weapons by which injuries were caused.
PW.7 and PW.8 are the wives of first and second deceased, who after knowing about the incident rushed to the scene of offence.
bone deep.
After visiting Govt.
The High Court vide its judgment has set aside the order of the Trial Court acquitting the accused and has companyvicted the accused under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC.
PW.16 is a doctor who treated the injured at Govt.
Trial Court after referring to evidence of eye witnesses came to the companyclusion that there were companytradictions and omissions.
After companypletion of investigation, PW.23 laid the charge sheet.
The medical evidence which was led by the prosecution did number support the ocular evidence led by so called eye witnesses.
W.23 is Investigating Officer who companyducted the investigation.
2, was also sitting on the same motor bike.
Doctor, PW.16, who appeared before the Court and recorded his evidence was number even put any question as to whether when Venkaiahanaidu was admitted in Government Hospital, Guntur he was companyscious or unconscious.
Thus, there was numberinconsistency with medical evidence and the ocular evidence.
Acquittal of A.12 to A.9 have been affirmed.
Hospital, Ponnur at which Hospital Siva Sankara died between 0530 PM to 0600 PM.
Hospital, Ponnur and recorded the statement of Sivarama Krishnaiah PW.
The others, who were following the two wheeler of the deceased witnessed the incident and reported the matter to police and shifted the second deceased to Ponnur Hospital, where the Doctor declared him dead and other injured P.W.5 was referred to Government Hospital, Guntur.
1 at 0600PM, on the basis of which statement, the FIR was registered, as Criminal Case No.
The accused did number lead any evidence.
Cut injury of 10x2cm.,
2, along with PWs.
skin deep on left inter scapular area on left of back of chest.
The Trial Court vide its judgment dated 24.12.2007 acquitted the accused.
PW.5, both in examination in chief and cross examination stated that he regained companysciousness after 20 days and next day of regaining companysciousness his statement was recorded.
PW.23, Investigating Officer hereinafter referred to as IO took up the investigation on 10.10.2003 itself.
The fact that weapon was number shown to the Doctor number in the cross examination attention of the Doctor was invited towards the weapon, is number of much companysequence in the facts of the present case where there was clear medical evidence that injuries companyld be caused by knife, axe and battle axe.
1 , Somarowthu Siva Sankara Rao hereinafter referred as deceased No.
PW.5 on 14.10.2003 was shifted to Hi tech Hospital, Guntur where he regained companysciousness after 20 days.
Doctor himself has admitted that he has number described the shapes of the injuries, depth and middle of the injuries.
He stated that he lost companysciousness which he regained at Hitech Hospital, Guntur.
His father and Siva Sankara Rao were attacked by the accused with axes and knives.
Ms. Prerna Singh, learned companynsel has appeared on behalf of the State.
PW.5 himself came in the witness box and was examined.
The submission has also been raised that it was put to the Doctor that injuries by battle axe companyld be half moon, Doctor himself admitted in his report that he has number reported depth of the injury, middle of the injury number margins of the injuries have been numbered.
The IO also visited the place of incident, seized various articles, prepared the sketch map and also got the spot photographs.
Hospital, Guntur.
Hospital, Guntur.
ADM 8373, all of them companylected deadly weapons like axes, knives, rods and sticks, went in the lorry of A.18 and dashed the two wheeler in which both the deceased and PW.5 were travelling.
It has companye on evidence that immediately after occurrence both Shiva Shankar Rao and Venkaiah Naidu were taken to Government Hospital, Ponnur.
When, PW.5 himself has stated that he was attacked by knife and stick the injuries which were numbericed by the Doctor were caused by knife and stick, since there is numberinconsistency between the ocular evidence of PW.5 and medical evidence of PW.16, the reason given by the Trial Court for discarding the evidence of PW.5 is incorrect.
ASHOK BHUSHAN, J. These appeals have been filed against judgment dated 09.07.2013 of High Court of Andhra Pradesh, allowing the Criminal Appeal No.
The evidence of eye witnesses who were accompanying the deceased Nos.1 and 2 companyld number have been discarded as interested witnesses whereas they were family members who were accompanying the deceased on the motor cycle and others on two wheeler which eye witnesses companyld prove the incident.
This was one of the reasons for discarding the evidence of PW.5.
Valivala Akkaiah A19 caught hold of my hands and legs and thrown me.
Non examination of Doctor to prove that injured PW.5 was first taken to Government Hospital, Ponnur was inconsequential and immaterial, when there is numberdispute that injured was admitted in the Government Hospital, Guntur and was examined by the Doctor at 6.15 p.m. on the same day.
