But according to P.W. 3, the mother of the deceased, when she went up to the place of occurrence there was numberody there.
P.W. 1 had at least some motive to falsely implicate the appellant.
1 and 2 left their Village and were going to ???
This is laid to be the motive for the murder.
30 p m would seem to show that they must have heard of the murder at 10 p.m or later, roughly the same time as the police heard about it.
for seeing festival there and they were carrying a me vegetables with them on Kavadies to sell there.
In the meantime the deceased who came there also abused the appellant and others of his party.
Nikka Venkateswara Rao, P W. 5, was said to have interfered and been beaten by the appellant and others.
p.m. P.W. 1 went to Telaprolu and informed the Circle Inspector of Police.
They sent word through some villagers to the members of the family of the deceased about the incident and as numberody turned up till 9.
The arrival of P.W. 3 to 5 at the scene of occurrence after 11.
They saw the appellant companying on a cycle and passing them and hearing a thud turned back and saw the appellant it being the deceased.
In the circumstances we are number able to agree that the presence of the three kavadies at the scene of occurrence and the fact that the prosecution story is substantially the same as was set out in the F.I.R. can be said to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased and P.Ws.
The P.Ws.
1 and 2 waited at the spot till 9 Oclock and then P.W. 1 went and nude a report about the incident to the police leaving P.W 2 near the body.
The FIR was registered at 10 Oclock and the Inspector and two policemen reached the scene of occurrence at 11 30 p.m. The learned Session Judge after companysidering all the evidence acquitted the accused Out the High Court on appeal by the State set aside the judgment of the Session Judge and companyvicted the appellant.
After the incident P.Ws.
the matter was reported to the police and P.Ws 3 and 4 were also informed about it.
This was at about 5 Oclock.
If the occurrence took place at 5 p.m. as alleged by P.W s 1 and 2 the report to the police at 10 p.m. would show that the who story as found in the F.I.R. had been thought up by that time.
1 and 2 were going to Telaprolu together and the incident took place when they were to going.
It may well be that finding the dead body at 9 pm.
The evidence of P Ws 1 and 2 shows that they and the deceased bad never before gone together to sell vegetables.
The appellant was number the person who was directly involved in the quarrel on the 1st of April.
1 and 2 are the only two witnesses who speak to the occurrence.
Alagiriswami, J. This is an appeal against the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court allowing an appeal by the State Against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge Krishna quitting the appellant and companyvicting him for an offence under Section 302 I.P.C. The prosecution case was that on 2 4 1969 at 4 p.m. the deceased and P.Ws.
There was an incident on the 1st of April 1969 in which there was a quarrel between one Anne Kateswara Rao and the mother of the deceased and some others belonging to Anne Koteswara Raos party came there and beat the brother of the deceased. ???
The place where the occurrence took place was the road for people from ten or twelve villages to go to Telaprolu and many people were passing along and he companyld very well have asked some of them to go and tell the police or immediately after the occurrence he companyld have asked P.W. 2.
P.Ws 1 and 2 were going in from while the deceased was companying behind.
