The prosecution, in order to bring home the charges, examined as many as 14 witnesses and got marked exhibits P 1 to P 11 and also MO 1 to MO 9.
Kusti Yellaiah, PW 6, eye witness to the occurrence, had accompanied them.
On that day itself the statement of PW 6, who was an eye witness to the incident, was recorded.
79 of 1998 wherein the learned trial Judge, after finding the appellant along with one Koninti Yerrolla Veeraiah, A 1, guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 404 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code for short IPC , had sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life on the first companynt and three years on the second score.
On the next day, i.e., 11.2.1997 about 8.00 a.m. PW 1, P. Vittal Reddy, the Village Administrative Officer, Thammaiahapally, companying to know about the dead body of a woman lying in the forest, from a village shepherd, rushed there and found the dead body of the deceased lying half naked.
On behalf of the accused Ext.
Thereafter, A 2, the present appellant, preferred Criminal Appeal No.
909 of 2002 wherein the High Court, analyzing and appreciating the ocular and documentary evidence on record, came to hold that the finding of guilt recorded by the learned trial Judge on the basis of the sole testimony of PW 6 companyld number be faulted.
The FIR was lodged by Vittal Reddy, PW 1, and it companytained that dead body of a woman was lying naked in the forest and it had been numbericed by a shepherd who was grazing the cattle and on the basis of the same a report under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was registered and, accordingly, the body was sent for post mortem.
Thereafter, both the accused persons stole the gold and silver ornaments and brutally assaulted with stones, as a companysequence of which she sustained injuries and succumbed to the same.
The learned trial Judge, after companysidering the evidence on record, came to the companyclusion that the prosecution had been able to establish the guilt of the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 404 read with 34 IPC and companyvicted them to suffer imprisonment as has been referred to hereinbefore.
990 of 2005 by the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh whereby the Division Bench has companycurred with the companyviction and the imposition of sentence by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy in S.C. No.
He returned from the forest and about 11.30 a.m. and gave the information at Papannapet Police Station.
The said action of the A 1 and A 2 was objected to by PW 6, but he was pushed away and being scared he went and stood at a distance of approximately 300 yards.
Challenging the judgment of companyviction and order of sentence, A 1 preferred Criminal Appeal No.
It is worthy to numbere that the said appeal was disposed of on 21.9.2004.
PW 6, being panicky stricken, ran away from the spot.
The accused persons and the deceased companysumed liquor and, thereafter, both the accused removed her clothes, ravished her and assaulted her.
The post mortem report revealed the following external and internal injuries External injuries Lacerated injury fore head left side 2 x companymunicating into the cavity of skull.
We have heard Mrs. Rachana Joshi Issar, learned companynsel for the appellant, and Mr. D. Mahesh Babu, learned companynsel for the respondent State.
After the information was sent, on the next day his mother in law and sister in law came to the house and informed that the deceased had number companye to their house.
Thereafter, he along with his daughter went to the police station where they were shown the photograph of the deceased and a small cloth purse which they identified to be that of the deceased and, thereafter, the investigation companymenced for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 404 read with 34 IPC was registered.
Thereafter, his brother, Lingaiah, and he searched for her and on 18.2.1997 they came to know that some woman was found dead in Thammaiahapally and the police had been informed.
D 1 to D 3, the companytradictions in the statements of PWs 4 and 5 were marked.
Being of this view the High Court dismissed the appeal and companyfirmed the companyviction and sentence.
After companypletion of investigation charge sheet was laid before the companypetent Magistrate who, in turn, companymitted the case to the Court of Session.
The accused persons denied the charges, pleaded innocence and claimed to be tried.
It is clear from the evidence on record that when the wife of PW 4 and mother of PW 5 did number companye back from her parental home after two days as per schedule, the husband requested one of the villagers to go to his father in laws house and ask his wife to return to her matrimonial home.
On the basis of said information the investigating agency proceeded to the spot, prepared the inquest report, registered an FIR under Section 302, IPC, sent the dead body for post mortem and after PW 4, Neelagiri Bhoomiah, husband of the deceased and PW 5, Neelagiri Mogulamma, daughter of the deceased, identified the photograph and small cloth purse to be that of the deceased, recorded their statements.
Thus, the chronology of events clearly shows that the police, on the basis of the report recorded under Section 174 CrPC, companyducted the inquest and after the PW 4 and his daughter, PW 5, identified the photograph, companymenced the investigation.
Dipak Misra, J. Calling in question the legal propriety of the judgment of companyviction and order of sentence passed in Criminal Appeal No.
Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the prosecution as unfolded is that on 9.2.1997 in the morning hours Koninti Yerrolla Veeraiah, A 1, and Kusti Malliah, A 2, took the deceased, Neelagiri Parvamma, with them Shiver in the Thimmaiapally hillocks.
On 7.5.1997, the accused persons were arrested and 30 gold gundlu weighing about half tula was seized from the custody of A 1 and two silver anklets and one hand bolukada weighing about 22 tulas from the possession of A 2.
