While the case as made out by the prosecution that the accused No.1 had become crippled on account of an attack of polio and was physically unable to lift a stone weighing 25 to 30 Kg.
In the early hours of 10th May, 1994, the accused were said to be proceeding towards Thellabanda and one R. Venkataramana who was watering his fields is alleged to have focused his torch light on them.
In order to prove that the death of Khambam Vankatramana Reddy was homicidal, the prosecution relied upon the evidence of PWs1, 2, 3, 8 and 11.
The case of the prosecution is that the victim and the accused persons were related to each other.
After companypletion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer filed chargesheet against the three accused persons, who denied their involvement in the incident and claimed that they had been falsely implicated on account of the subsisting rivalry between the two groups.
Having companymitted the crime, the accused Nos.
1 to 3 ran away and PW 1 raised an alarm.
On the basis of the above, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted all the three accused persons of the charges framed against them.
size iv Haemorrhagic fluid present in the cranium about 500 ml.
It was companytended that on account of his physical disability, it was impossible for the appellant No.1 to lift a stone weighing about 25 to 30 Kgs.
2 and 3 caught hold of her hands and gagged her by stuffing a cloth in her mouth to prevent her from crying out.
In the appeal preferred by the State of Andhra Pradesh, the High Court disagreed with the findings of the learned Sessions Judge and observed that there was numberpositive evidence on record to show that the appellant No.1 is a crippled man.
The doctor who examined the dead body was of the opinion that the deceased had died on account of the head injuries.
It was the case of the prosecution that the relations between the accused and the family of the deceased were strained and there was subsisting hostility between the two groups.
PW 8 is one of the inquest witnesses and PW 11 is a Sub Inspector of police who companyducted the inquest and deposed that he had found an injury near the left eye of the deceased as also on the left thumb.
On 10th May, 1994, at about 10.00 A.M., PW 1 lodged a companyplaint which was registered as Crime No.
On such exhortation, the 1st accused is said to have picked up a big stone and had thrown the same on the head of the deceased, as a result whereof, the deceased sustained fatal injuries on his head and died instantaneously.
2and 3 and the 3rd accused is the husband of the second accused.
It was also the defence of the accused that the story as narrated by PW 1 should number be accepted for the reason that the accused No.1 had suffered from polio and having been crippled by the said disease, he was unable to walk about for long without the assistance of an escort.
In fact, a certificate issued by one Dr. M. Venkatadri, Civil Assistant Surgeon, Gandhi Hospital, Secunderabad, on 5th January, 1994, which was exhibited on behalf of the defence, disclosed that the accused appellant No.1 herein is permanently disabled.
1 to 3 running away.
The 3rd accused and PW 2, Khambam Gangi Reddy, the father of the deceased, were brothers.
in the manner suggested by the prosecution.
According to her, the accused Nos.
1 to 3 to be responsible for causing the death of the deceased.
size on left side which companyresponds to external injury No.1 ii Fracture of the left parietal bone present 3 4 cm.
Muscles of the neck are numbermal.
PW 1 is the widow of the deceased.
According to the prosecution, on 9th May, 1994, the deceased harvested his paddy crop and placed it in a heap on Thellabanda near Koraparthivaripalle bus stop and on that night the deceased and his wife, PW 1 slept near the heap of paddy to keep a watch over the same.
PW 1 is said to have narrated the incident to him and then she went to the village and informed her family members about the said incident.
3 had died during the pendency of the trial, the case against him stood abated.
PW 7 then rushed to the spot and found the deceased with head injury.
The learned Sessions Judge upon appraisal of the evidence found the story of the prosecution to be improbable, basing his decision on the evidence that the appellant No.1 herein had been crippled by polio and it was physically impossible for him to lift a heavy stone weighing about 25 to 30 Kgs.
size On dissection of head and neck Fracture of the maxillary bone 2 3 cm.
While the appellant No.1 was prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, the two other accused were prosecuted under Section 302 IPC read with Section 34 IPC, in the alternative under Section 302 IPC read with Section 114 IPC and under Section 342 IPC.
size iii Contusion present over the left parietal region of the brain about 3 x 4 cm.
On hearing the alarm, one Srivargani Guravaiah, PW 7, who was also said to be watching his paddy near the scene of the offence, focused his torch light and saw the accused Nos.
This appeal is directed against the aforesaid judgment of companyviction and sentence passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh.
and to throw it down on the head of the deceased.
At the same time, the 3rd accused exhorted the 1st accused to kill the deceased who was still in a sound sleep.
On the same day, PW 11, a Sub Inspector of police, companyducted inquest in respect of the dead body in the presence of PW 8 and thereafter the body was sent to the Government Hospital, Piler, for companyducting post mortem.
PW 2 is the father of the deceased and PW 3 is the doctor who companyducted autopsy on the body of Khambam Venkatramana Reddy.
The 1st accused is the son of accused Nos.
PW 1 is said to have woken up on hearing the numberse of the accused persons proceeding towards Thellabanda and in the beam of her torch light she claims to have seen and recognized the accused persons.
The High Court went on further to observe that even if the defence story that the appellant No.1 had suffered a polio attack was accepted, such attack was always to the legs and number to the hands and on such supposition, the High Court came to a finding that the appellant No.1 was strong enough to lift the stone weighing about 25 to 30 Kgs.
The learned Sessions Judge also observed that it was improbable for two old people to overpower a young woman, namely, PW 1, and immobilize her so that the appellant No.1 companyld pick up and throw the heavy stone at the head of the deceased.
ALTAMAS KABIR, J. The appellants herein along with one Khambham Pai Reddy were prosecuted for causing the death of Khambam Venkatramana Reddy.
From the evidence adduced on behalf of the defence, the learned Sessions Judge found that the appellant No.2 was 59 years old and the 3rd accused was 68 years at the relevant time.
