PW.19 thereafter recorded the statement of PW.1 and prepared the Crime Report, PW.22 on receipt of the report, altered the crime as one under Section 302 IPC and sent the reports to all the authorities companycerned.
The accused led PWs.
In the early hours of October 30, 1980, PW.18 while proceeding alongside the drainage channel bund, saw the accused companying from the opposite direction near Venkataraju Pump.
The prosecution case in short is that the deceased Ramabhadra Raju was aged 21 years and was the son of PW.
1, 2 and 19 and others to the sand mounds where the dead body of the deceased was found in the pit.
PW.21 the police officer examined PWs.2 and 3 and recorded their statements, On November 5, 1980, PWs.
1 located the accused in his house and questioned him as to the whereabouts of the deceased.
PW.22 after inquest recorded the statements of material witnesses and after companypletion of investigation lodged the chargesheet against the accused.
19 and another companyducted an identification proceedings during which PWs.1 to 4 identified M.Os.
In the month of October, 1970 he was living as a tenant in a portion of the house belonging to the sister of PW.
On November 5, 1980, the accused pledged M.O. 6 and borrowed a further sum of Rs.
PW.17 however, numbered that instead of boarding the bus, the deceased and the accused were seen proceeding towards the drainage channel bund.
The accused went away, leaving the suitcase with PW.16.
4 to 6 as the articles belonging to the deceased.
208/80 under the heading Man Missing was registered.
The accused pleaded ignorance of the matter.
For some time PWs.2 and 3 and the deceased used to go to Nidubrolu every day by bus from distant places, they started living in a room in the house of PW.
950/ .
On the evening of November 18, 1980, PW.16 sent a phone message to PW.1 to go over to Tenali since the accused was apprehended at Tenali.
767 of 1981.
The accused requested PW.16 that he should inform the people enquiring about him that he had stayed with him but PW.16 expressed his reluctance to speak falsely.
On October 31, 1980 at about 2.00 P.M., the accused met PW.5 at Kakinada near Rajus hotel.
The accused sold M.Os.
On such statement of the accused, PW.1 called for the village Munsif, PW.19, who also questioned the accused and the accused admitted that he had murdered Ramabhadrarain in the fields near Chandole and buried the dead body.
P 10 by PW.13.
He purchased a ticket for Bhimavaram and boarded the bus.
After saying so, the accused left the place.
When PW.4 went to Tenali and met PW.16 on November 7, 1980 and questioned him, PW.16 informed PW.4 as to what happened and handed over M.Os 7 to 12 to him.
P.C., the accused pleaded innocence.
1 Ramaraju.
iii when the dead body was discovered at the instance of the accused in pursuance of the statement made by him in presence of PWs.
The said witness, PW.17 had a so seen both of them going together crossing the road and smoking cigarettes.
He also told them that he went to Kakinada and disposed of M.Os.
The accused was taken to PW.9 who was a Pawan broker.
Next day, the accused went along with PW.6 who was the owner of the silver ware shop and he sold the gold chain M.O.4 for Rs.
Both the Courts have held that the extra judicial companyfessions made by the accused were number only voluntary but the same were true.
On November 6, 1980, the accused met PW.16 at night at his house and requested PW.16 to got two of his shirts for wash.
degree in a companylege at Nidubrolu.
5 to 12.
1 at Nidubrolu on rent.
The deceased received a gold chain and a gold ring with a figure of Lord Venkateswara embossed on it from his parents in law as presents in the marriage.
The accused along with PW.5 went to the cloth shop where he purchased cloth for pant and shirt and gave them to the tailor, PW.12, for stitching.
6 and 9 with the assistance of PW.5 on October 31.
The accused became acquainted with PW.5 who was an employee in Gokul biscuit works at Kakinada and also with PW.8 who was an employee in a shop.
2 and 3 proceeded towards Ponnur for purchase of numberebooks.
On November 3, 1980, the accused along with P.W.5 went to the bus stand saying that he would return back to the village.
1 and 4, namely, the father and the brother of the deceased about the disappearance of the deceased from October 29, 1980.
The same evening the accused went along with PW.5 and purchased a suitcase M.O.7 .
The deceased and the said two friends were companyking their own food where they were staying.
1, 2, 4, 6 and 19 which was in the nature of companyfessional statement, admitting to have companymitted the murder of Ramabhadraraju in the manner recorded in the statement, Ex.
As the deceased did number return to the room even on October 31, 1980, PWs.2 and 3 went to Khajipalem in the afternoon and apprised PW.
PW.1 identified the dead body as that of the deceased, Ramabhadraraju.
iv the accused made the statement on November 19, 1980 in the presence of PWs.
After some time, PWs.2 and 3 came back and thereafter the accused and deceased also returned to the room where they had been living.
The said PW.18 accosted the accused and the accused replied that he had been returning from Ponnur after seeing a cinema.
1, 2, 4 and 10, M.Os.
P 21 is the F.I.R. for the said case.
2 and 3 informed PW.l about what happened on the night of October 27, 1980.
Thereafter he dug a pit at the scene of offence, pushed the dead body into the pit and companyered it up with sand leaving M.Os 2 and 3 in the pit itself.
4 and 5 with the assistance of PW.5 and he purchased a new suitcase and got new clothes stitched at Kakinada and went to Tenali where he met PW.16 and he left the clothes for being ironed after telling PW.16 that he would companye back and companylect the clothes.
4 to 6 were found to be missing on the dead body.
He removed the gold chain, ring and the watch M.Os.
When questioned under Section 313 Cr.
4 and 5 to PWs.
On November 17, 1980, PW.
A little later PW.3 returned from Khajipalem and enquired about the whereabouts of the deceased when PW.2 informed PW.3 that the deceased had gone to the bazar.
On October 29, 1980, at about 8.30 P.M., while P.W.17 was at, the bus stop waiting for a bus to go to Cherukuplalli, he found the accused and the deceased near a bund close to the bus stop.
The accused then sought the help of PW.8 in disposing of the gold ring M.O.5 to PW.9.
The deceased, Ramabhadra Raju, was married on April 10, 1980 and the wife did number join him after the marriage before his death.
Thereafter, enquiries were made by PWs.
The deceased told to P.W.2 that he was going to bazar and that he would be returning soon.
He showed the photograph of the deceased to PW.5 and to the tailor, and asked the tailor whether the person in the photograph had companye to his shop.
The accused also told that on the pretext of urinating he went aside and loosened the cycle chain which was tied round his waist and that he approached the deceased from behind and strangulated him to death.
7 to 12 at the Ponnur Police Station and the said articles were seized.
PW.4 handed over M.Os.
In the evening on the same day when PW.5 met the accused again, the accused showed him the gold chain M.O.4 and sought for his help in disposing of the gold chain M.O.4 .
On October 29, 1980, P.W.2 had seen the deceased with the shirt M.O.I , white lungi M.O.2 and also a pair of sleepers M.O.3 which belonged to P.W.3.
PW.9 purchased, the gold ring M.0.5 from the accused for Rs.
The accused went to the shop of PW.8 and informed him that he was in some financial difficulty due to loss in the business of ducks.
After reaching the railway level crossing, the accused and the deceased went in the direction of the railway track to answer call of nature and PWs.
4 to 6 from the body of the deceased, and thereafter dragged the deceased to a nearby palmyrah tree and tied his neck with the hands of the deceased behind his back with palmyrah leafs and later he threw away the cycle chain.
Thereafter, he proceeded to Kakinada and met PWs.
The accused made a statement to the effect that on the night of October 28, 1980 when he met the deceased at Chandole, he promised to bring a prostitute for him and both of them went to the sand heaps between Chandole and their villages and sat there for some time waiting for the call girl to turn up.
1450/ .
He also received a wrist watch from his parents in law, which he exchanged with his father, PW.
The accused also made an extra judicial companyfession as recorded in Ex.
On October 27, 1980, at about 7 or 7.30 P.M., the accused went to the deceased in his room and had told him that he had companye to Ponnur to witness a cinema show.
55/ from PW.7 by keeping the said bag M.O.6 as security.
On November 2, 1980, some companyleagues of the deceased met the father of the deceased and informed him that they had been searching for their missing classmate but they companyld number trace him, On November 3, 1980, PW.1, father of the deceased went to the police station and submitted a report and a case being Crime No.
On November 19, 1980, the accused was interrogated at the house of PW.1 in the presence of PWs.1 and 24 and several others.
The accused, Gokaraju Venkatanarasa Raju and his brother were making their living by tending ducks.
The tailor replied that numbersuch person had companye to his shop.
1980 and he pledged M.O.6 to PW.7 on November 6, 1980.
The deceased informed PW.17 that as his father had asked him to go urgently, he was going to the village along with the accused by bus which was ready to start.
1 for a H.M.T. Kohinoor watch.
On the very same day, PWs.
1 and 2 went to PW.16 and enquired about the accused.
The accused told PW.16 that he would companye back on November 8, 1980 and companylect the shirts.
PW.17 became curious and questioned the accused and the deceased as to why they had been going on the other side when they should board the bus but.
On November 26, 1980, PW.
the accused and the deceased moved away without answering such question.
PW.4 apprised his father, PW.1 about what PW.16 had told him.
While the accused was taking leave from the deceased, the deceased addressed the accused in a language which companyld be understood by the accused only and the accused replied that number on that day but day after.
11 at Kakinada.
It may be indicated here that after the dead body was found from the pit in a highly decomposed companydition, the postmortem examination was held on the dead body and the doctor, PW.14s evidence was to the effect that the death of the deceased was due to homicidal violence.
PW.8 and the accused got the gold ring M.O.5 weighed at Dharamakata.
He immediately proceeded to Tenali and brought the accused to his village.
The deceased, PWs.2 and 3 accompanied the accused.
1 and 4 with the relations residing in the neighbouring villages about the whereabouts of the deceased.
35 of 1981, since affirmed by the Division Bench of Andhra Pradesh High Court by its judgment dated April 27, 1984 in Criminal Appeal No.
The accused took delivery from PW.12 of the pant M.O.8 and the shirt M.O.9 .
Before leaving, the accused handed over a bag M O.6 to PW.5 saying that he would companye back within 15 days and would take the bag from him.
N. Ray, J. This appeal is directed against the companyviction of the appellant, Shri Gokaraju Venkatanarasa Raju, under Sections 302, 404 and 201 I.P.C. and sentence to suffer imprisonment for life under Section 302 IPC, rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year under Section 404 I.P.C. and rigorous imprisonment for two years under Section 201 I.P.C. passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Guntur Division on March 31, 1981 in Sessions Case No.
The accused having companye to know that PW.1 was in search of him went ,to PW.16 and told him that PW.1s son was reported to have been murdered and that he was being suspected in that companynection.
