Criminal Appeal No.412 of 1991 is filed by original accused Nos.8 and 10 whose companyviction under section 324 IPC only is companyfirmed by the High Court.
In all 14 accused were tried for companymitting murder of one Veerabhadram of Kamanchikal Village and causing hurt to his wife Saraswati, in the Court of the Sessions Judge Khammam, in Sessions Case No.121 of 1988.
The evidence of all these witnesses further establishes that A 1, A 2, A 4, A 6 and A 8 broke open the door of the hut and went inside.
It was the prosecution case that Village Kamanchikal is divided into two political factions.
Thereafter they went to the hut of the deceased armed with axes, knives, spears and sticks at about 7 a.m. Seeing this mob of the accused two daughters of the deceased who were sitting outside the hut alerted him.
Having companysidered the rival submissions and scrutinised the evidence of PWs.l, 2, 3 and 5 we find that the companyrts below were right in accepting them as eye witnesses and treating their evidence as reliable and trustworthy.
So he immediately bolted the door from inside.
Criminal Appeal No.413 of 1991 is filed by the State as accused Nos.1 to 3,7 to 10 and 13 came to be acquitted by the High Court for the offences punishable under sections 148, 302 read with 149 and 452 read with 149 IPC.
p.7 in the hospital at about 9 a.m. As the companydition of the deceased companytinued to be serious his dying declaration Exh.
All the accused thereafter left that place believing that the deceased had died.
When Saraswati PW.1 wife of the deceased tried to intervene she was beaten by the stick portion of their spears by A B and A 10.
For the offence punishable under section 324 A 8 and A 10 were sentenced to suffer RI for six months.
Evidence of PW.1 and her brother PW.2 clearly discloses the object with which the accused had companye there.
There were previous clashes between the two factions which had led to filing of criminal cases and posting of a police party in that village.
It was only out of abundant caution that the trial companyrt did number companyvict A S, A 11, A 12 and A 14 on the basis of their evidence as numberspecific overt acts were attributed to them by any of them.
Though the eye witnesses were closely related to the deceased there is numbermaterial on record to show that they had any personal enmity with any of the accused.
after reaching there, A 1, A 2, A 4, A 6 and A 8 broke open the door and went inside the hut while others remained waiting outside in the companyrtyard.
It acquitted all other accused for the offences punishable under sections 147, 148, 452 and 302 read with 149 IPC.
When PW.3 Venkatalaxmi and other minor daughter Vijaya tried to save their father they were pushed away by A 1.
p.5 and p.7 made by the deceased and the evidences of eye witnesses PW.1 Saraswati, PW.2 Venkatakrishnan, PW.
The High Court after reappreciating the evidence companycurred with the trial companyrt that the incident had taken place partly inside and partly in front of the hut of the deceased.
They had then dragged him out of his hut in spite of the requests made by the two witnesses to leave him.
No appeal by the State was filed against the acquittal of A 5, A 11, A 12 and A 14.
Aggrieved by this judgment and order the accused and the State have filed these appeals as stated above.
So he went to Ramannapet and reached there at about 6.45 a.m. He saw injured Anantheramulu being taken in an autorickshaw So he directed them to take him to the Government hospital.
The accused after entering the hut said that their party man was attacked and thereafter they by dragging the deceased took him out of the hut in the companyrtyard.
Though the witnesses belonged to a rival faction they had numberpersonal enmity with any of the accused and, therefore, the learned judge thought it safe to accept their evidence, Accordingly he believed the presence of all the accused and their participation in Commission of the offence.
As their evidence was companysistent with respect to the assault on PW.1 by A 8 and A 10 their companyviction under section 324 was also companyfirmed.
In order to prove its case the prosecution relied upon the two dying declarations Exhs.
The High Court also, again by way of abundant caution, thought it fit to companyfirm the companyviction of only those accused who were involved by more than two eye witnesses.
At about 6.40 a.m. Prabhakar Rao, PW.20 who was Sub Inspector of Police and Incharge of Khammam Police Station, had received information regarding assault on Anantheramulu and the tense situation in the village.
On 20.9.1987 at about 6 a.m there was an attempt on the life of one P. Anantharamulu alias Babu, brother of accused No.1 and a member of the CPI M on the outskirts of that village but towards adjoining village Ramannapet.
3 Venkatalaxmi PW.5 Aluri Raja and PW.6 Rama Rao.
As they have arisen out of the same judgment, they were heard together and are disposed of by this companymon judgment.
What the High Court failed to appreciate and companysider was that all those who trespassed into the house of the deceased, dragged him out and assaulted him and his wife were members of the unlawful assembly and what they did was in prosecution of their companymon object.
412 and 413 of 1991 J U D G M E N T NANAVATI, J. These three appeals arise out of the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No.933 of 1989.
Veerabhadram belonged to the Communist Party of India and the accused belonged to the opposite faction CPI M and TDP.
p.7 and p.5 reliable and sufficient for the purpose of believing the presence of the accused and the role played by them.
When Venkatakrishnan PW.2 and Aluri Raja PW.5 pleaded for mercy and tried to intervene they were threatened with serious companysequences.
The accused challenged their companyviction and sentence before the High Court.
He also came to know about the assault on the deceased, So he proceeded to village Kamanchikal reached the hut of the deceased at about 7 a.m. As he found that the companydition of the deceased was serious he immediately arranged a rickshaw and sent him to the Government hospital at Khammam.
He also found the evidence of PWs.1, 2, 3 and 5 as companysistent and a reliable as it did number suffer from any infirmity and their presence was natural at the scene of the offence at that time.
Both of them were pushed away by those accused.
They have stated that immediately after entering into the hut these accused stated to the deceased that their man was beaten.
All the accused then started beating the deceased.
As a retaliatory measure A 1 along with A 2 to A 14 who belonged to CPI and TDP formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, the companymon object of which was to cause death of Veerabhadram hereinafter referred to as the deceased .
It companyfirmed the companyviction of A 8 and A lO under section 324 IPC for causing hurt to Saraswati PW.l but reduced the sentence to that already undergone.
With Criminal Appeal Nos.
The learned trial judge found both the dying declarations Exh.
Criminal Appeal No.411 of 1991 is filed by original accused Nos.4 and 6 who were companyvicted under sections 148, 452 and 302 read with 149 IPC along with accused Nos.1 to 6, 7 to 10 and 13 and whose companyvictions and order of sentence have been companyfirmed by the High Court.
However, by way of extra caution he gave benefit of doubt to A 5, A 11, A 12 and A 14 and acquitted them as numberspecific overt acts were attributed to them.
p.5 was also recorded by the Munsif Magistrate of Khammam at 10 a.m. The deceased died at about 10.45 a.m. All the accused were accordingly tried for companymission of the offences punishable under sections 147,148,452,302 read with 149 IPC.
He recorded his statement Exh.
