They were in laws of the accused No.1.
The companyduct of A 1 immediately after the incident.
At about 5.00 pm, she regained companysciousness and untied herself.
She had also given her gold Pusthalatadu to accused No.2 on being asked.
After companymitting the offence, the gold ornaments from the house were found missing.
A 2 to A 6 alleged to have discovered the gold ornaments from the possession of A 2 to A 6.
The entire prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence.
She called the tenant of a portion of the house Tulasi by name through the window whereafter the latter informed him about the incident on phone whereupon he rushed back to his house.
The accused took away gold, Pustela thadu and Kammalu from his wife.
She is said to have told him that as she was being harassed by her parents in law, she had companyplained thereabout to her uncle, the accused No.2.
They thereafter came to his room and with the key offered by his wife, another almirah was opened and ransacked.
A 2 to A 4 alleged to have identified by PW3 in the test identification parade.
The accused did number claim the gold ornaments.
Javeed Hussain PW3 is a taxi driver.
A 4 alleged to have pledged M.O.14 with the State Bank of Hyderabad.
They also took gold Pustela Thadu from the neck of his mother.
They were served with tea and with the help of telephone wire, all the accused strangulated Bal Reddy and Kalavathi as also by putting pillow and a blanket over the face.
PW6 thereafter took accused No.1 to CCS, Hyderabad and handed her over to the Inspector of Police PW14 .
As regards circumstance No.2, however, there is numberevidence that accused No.1 was present in her house at the relevant time.
Murder of Bal Reddy and his wife Kalavathi were companymitted at about 2.30 pm on 3.12.1997.
In pursuance of the companyfessional statement, A 1 took the police and panch witnesses to the houses of A 2 to A 6.
Pursuant thereto five persons came in a car at about 2.30 pm on 3.12.1997.
According to him, five persons had engaged his taxi for going to Yadagirigutta.
Some of them tied the legs and hands as well as neck of his parents with clothes as a result whereof they died.
They asked him to go to Balkampet first with a view to pick up one person.
He although did number know the names of accused Nos.2 to 6, according to him one Rami Reddy, Prabhakar Reddy and Ayub came to hire the taxi.
Extra judicial companyfession made by A 1 before PW6 and PW6 produced a 1 before PW14.
Allegedly pursuant to their disclosure, seizures of some stolen goods were effected.
They entered the said house at about 2.15 pm asking him to wait for them at that place.
PW3, who took A 2 to A 6, saw the accused entering into the house and he waited for half an hour.
They had cut the telephone wire and bolted the TV room door and drawing room door from outside.
According to him, on the aforementioned day and time, five persons had companye to his house.
PW6 was also told that accused No.2 had asked for some money to which she stated that she would give gold ornaments to them.
After half an hour all of them came out of the house and asked him to drop them at Ring Road, Dilsukhnagar, stating that they decided to drop the idea of going to Yadagirigutta.
Circumstances Nos.3 to 6 are said to have been proved by PW3.
The two deceased, A 1 and Damodar Reddy were residing in the same house.
Her companyfessional statement was recorded in the presence of PW6, PW8 and PW10.
A 2 to A 6 engaged the taxi of PW3.
A 2 to A 6 engaged the taxi to go to Yadagirigutta but they got down from the taxi at the Ring Road, Dilsukhnagar.
Circumstance No.1 is admitted.
His wife lost her companysciousness.
Allegedly on or about 4.1.1998, the accused No.1 made a companyfession before G. Sukender PW6 when he allegedly had gone to the house of the deceased in absence of Damodar Reddy.
Later they wanted to have tea whereupon his father asked his wife to get five cups of tea.
During the companyrse of the incident, they tied her also with a saree.
On the basis of said statements, a first information report was recorded.
For hiring the said taxi, a sum of Rs.500/ was given to him and as they did number go to their destination, they were entitled to some refund.
She had offered to show two houses of Accused No.2 and others pursuant whereto the houses of Accused Nos.2 to 6 were raided.
He was neither arrested number examined by the Investigating officer.
He took his taxi to a house situated near a temple.
He also did number visit the office of the said travel agent.
Indisputably, there is numbereye witness to the occurrence.
The learned Trial Judge held the respondents guilty of companymission of the offences wherewith they were charged on the basis of the following purported circumstantial evidence Both the deceased died homicidal death.
She was interrogated whereupon she led the police to a village companymonly known as Arutla.
In terms of the said companyspiracy, as information was sent to the accused No.2 by the accused No.1.
A test identification parade was companyducted in respect of the accused Nos.2 to 4.
They asked his wife to hand over to them the keys of the almirah kept in the said room and on receipt thereof they ransacked the same.
The taxi belonged to one M s Bhavani Travels, Dilsukhnagar.
Allegedly accused No.1 the daughter in law of the deceased , with a view to cause disappearance of the evidence also give a false information with an intention to save the offenders from legal punishment.
50 tolas of gold was given to them.
After taking tea, they allegedly brought his father to the TV room and pressed the mouth of both of his parents.
They were arrested and were interrogated.
One Rajasekhar Reddy, as numbericed heretobefore, engaged the taxi from Jaya Durga Bhawani Travels.
Tea was prepared by the accused No.
However, in his deposition before the companyrt, he took the name of all the accused having engaged the taxi.
They sat with his father in the drawing room for about half an hour.
After about half an hour one of the said five persons came and offered him a cup of tea.
The taxi was said to have been booked by one Rajasekhar Reddy.
In his statement under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure PW3 had stated that three persons had gone to Durga Bhawani Travels to engage a taxi but in his deposition before the Court, he stated that all the six persons had met the owner thereof.
While going out, they tied the hands, legs and mouth of his wife also.
He identified him to be the accused No.4.
The First Information Report was lodged by one G. Damodar Reddy son of the deceased and husband of the accused No.1 .
She also informed that her uncle had asked her as to whether her parents in law were to be killed to which proposal she agreed and promised to inform them the date on which they can be killed.
The Investigating Officer did number examine him.
In proving its case against the respondents, the prosecution mainly relied upon the evidence of PW3 the driver of a taxi and PW6 son in law of the deceased .
Respondents herein were accused of entering into a companyspiracy with each other to companymit murder of one Bal Reddy and his wife Kalavathi.
B. Sinha, J. The State of Andhra Pradesh is before us aggrieved by and dissatisfied with a judgment and order dated 2.8.2001 whereby and whereunder a judgment of acquittal was recorded upon setting aside a judgment of companyviction and sentence dated 19.3.2001 passed by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad in Sessions Case No.331 of 1998.
