The present appeals by special leave assail the companyrectness of the said judgment and order.
The High Court after reappraisal of the entire evidence on record affirmed the companyviction and sentence awarded to the appellants and dismissed the appeal.
The police arrived at the spot and companyducted an inquest between 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. with the help of electric lights and two petromax lamps.
Electoral companytest took a bitter turn when the duo mentioned above sought the support of the deceased M. Chinna Pulla Reddy which he declined for he claimed to be a staunch companygressman companymitted to supporting the candidate set up by his party.
The prosecution case may be summarised as under Gosu Ramchandra Reddy A1 and his two brothers Gosu Jayarami Reddy A2 Gosu Jayaranga Reddy A3 together with Gosu Rameshwar Reddy A4 and Gosu Rajagopal Reddy A5 sons of Gosu Ramchandra Reddy A1 all residents of village Aluru of Anantapur District in the State of A.P. were political activists owing their allegiance to the Telugu Desam Party.
P1 to P22 and MOs marked 1 to 20.
One person was having bombs while the remaining were armed with hunting sickles.
Once the presence of PWs 1, 2 and 3 was established by their own depositions which have remained unshattered and the supporting evidence of PWs 4 and 5, the version given by the said three witnesses cannot be brushed aside lightly.
The case was then made over to VIth Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Anantapur before whom the accused persons pleaded number guilty and claimed a trial.
Elections to MPTC ZPTC were held in July 2001 which saw Gosu Jayaranga Reddy A3 companytesting for M.P.T.C. from Virapuram village, while Gosu Ramchandra Reddy A1 sought election from the neighbouring Yerraguntapalli village.
Mabu and Ramamohan Reddy were sent by the witness to the Village to inform his mother and brother.
At this stage the witness ran away due to fear to the back side of the factory and left for Ramapuram her parents village.
Similarly Gosu Rajagopal Reddy A3 also hacked the deceased on the neck.
All of them were terrified by the sudden attack and started running away for shelter.
The witness ran towards labour room of the factory on the west side and stood behind the workers room from where he witnessed the occurrence.
The version of these witnesses who according to the prosecution were eye witnesses to the occurrence has been accepted as truthful by the trial companyrt as also the High Court in appeal.
At about 5 p.m. he heard a loud numberse from the factory.
In support of its case the prosecution examined PWs 1 to 10 apart from placing reliance upon the documents marked Ex.
A2 hurled two bombs, one of which fell on the bonnet of the Jeep and exploded while the other bomb exploded on the left side door of the vehicle.
He saw that when the deceased was running to the office room of the factory Gosu Ramachandra Reddy A1 hacked him with a hunting sickle on his head.
Despite extensive cross examination numberhing material has been extracted from the witnesses which companyld possibly discredit his testimony number was any specific companytention based on the said statement made in the companyrts below or urged before us.
It was on the basis of the said statement that the names of A6 to A10 were also included as persons responsible for the companymission of the offence.
The animosity arising out of the electoral debacle of the two accused persons provided the motive for a murderous assault and resultant death of M. Chinna Pulla Reddy on 31st July, 2001 at village Sajjaladinne where the deceased had established a slab polishing factory in the name and style of Reddy Reddy Slab Polishing factory.
The police arrived at the scene of occurrence at about 7 p.m., companyducted an inquest and sent the dead body for post mortem examination to the Government hospital at Tadipatri.
The opposite group active in the region and owing allegiance to the Congress party companyprised Shri Midde Chinna Pulla Reddy deceased his son Shri M. Sanjeeva Reddy PW1 and his two nephews M. Rammohan Reddy PW2 and M. Veeranjaneyuly PW3 all residents of village Kaveti Samudram in the District of Anantpur.
At the inquest the watchman told the witness that he had seen A6 to A10 outside the factory gate.
The prosecution case is that the deceased Shri M. Chinna Pulla Reddy reached his house at Tadipatri from his village in a Tata Sumo Jeep alongwith his son M. Sanjeeva Reddy PW1 and his nephews M. Rammohan Reddy PW2 and M. Veeranjaneyuly PW3 .
Eswaraiah PW5 was also a labourer who was working in the factory of the deceased Pulla Reddy.
Coming closer, accused Gosu Jayarami Reddy A2 hurled two bombs towards the Jeep out of which one fell and exploded on the bonnet of the Jeep while the other fell on its left side door and exploded thereby partially damaging the Jeep.
The witness was stunned out of fear and remained frozen at the place from where he watched the occurrence, while the accused left the place from the same gate carrying their hunting sickles stained with blood.
The witness himself went to the Police Station and lodged a report at Tadipatri Police Station, Ex.
The prosecution case is that A1 Gosu Ramchanda Reddy hacked the deceased on his head, while A3 Gosu Jayaranga Reddy assaulted him on his neck.
It is evident from the depositions of the three witnesses referred to above that the deceased Pulla Reddy had companye to his factory accompanied by PW 1 M. Sanjeeva Reddy, PW 2 M. Rammohan Reddy, PW 3 M. Veeranjaneya Reddy and Shankar the driver of the sumo jeep and that the deceased was killed inside the factory by five persons.
Instead they started nursing a grudge against M. Chinna Pulla Reddy who was in their view the cause of their humiliation in the electoral battle.
PW 1 had run towards the Labour room while the five assailants surrounded the deceased China Pulla Reddy.
The witness goes on to state that PW 3 M. Veeranjaneya Reddy also came to the spot after the occurrence and saw the dead body of the deceased.
The deceased also got down from the jeep and started running towards the office room of the factory, when A 1 Gosu Ramchandra Reddy and A3 to A5 viz.
This witness saw PWs 1 to 3, Mabu, Hanumantha Reddy near the dead body but did number see the assailants as they had run away from there.
From there the deceased and his companypanions came to the Slab Polishing Factory at Sajjaladinne at about 5.00 p.m. Hardly had Ganur Shankar the driver of the jeep parked the jeep at the factory office when A1 to A5 entered the factory from the main gate, with A2 carrying bombs and A1 A3 to A5 carrying hunting sickles.
A6 to A10 were, however, acquitted of the charges framed against them.
The depositions of PWs 4 and 5 substantially supports the prosecution case and proves the presence of the deceased Pulla Reddy, and PWs 1, 2 and 3 apart from Shanker, the driver of the Sumo jeep inside the companypound of the factory at 5 p.m. on 31st July, 2001 when the incident took place.
Gosu Jayaranga Reddy, Gosu Rameshwar Reddy and Gosu Rajagopal Reddy attacked him with the hunting sickles which they were carrying.
He returned to the factory within 10 minutes and found that Pulla Reddy had been hacked and was lying dead in a pool of blood at a short distance from the jeep.
Both of them were set up by Telugu Desam Party.
A2 was armed with bombs while the other accused were armed with hunting sickles.
To the same effect are the depositions of PW 2 and PW3 who too have fully supported the prosecution case and the narrative given by PW1.
They were also companyvicted and sentenced to ten years imprisonment for the offence punishable under Sections 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act.
Aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the Trial Court the appellants filed Criminal Appeal No.1112 of 2005 before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad.
It so happened that A1 and A3 were both defeated at the hustings.
The inmates of the Jeep ran for safety in different directions.
Both the bombs thrown at the jeep exploded whereafter PW 1 to PW 3 ran away.
One Hanumanatha Reddy and Mabu also accompanied them.
The accused did number, according to the prosecution, reconcile to the defeat.
The sentences were ordered to run companycurrently.
The Trial Court also directed payment of fine of Rs.10,000/ each by the accused persons and a default sentence of three months simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 IPC and a fine of Rs.1,000/ each for the offence under Sections 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act and in default simple imprisonment for a period of one month.
S. THAKUR, J. Political rivalry at times degenerates into personal vendetta where principles and policies take a back seat and personal ambition and longing for power drive men to companymit the foulest of deeds to avenge defeat and to settle scores.
These appeals by special leave present a somewhat similar picture and assail the judgment and orders of companyviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Anantapur of Gooty and the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in appeal.
