All the other accused meanwhile watched to prevent others from companying there.
Edges are clear cut.
An incised wound of 2 cms length and 4 cms deep near the right side of the thorasic spine.
Edges are clear cut.
P.2 a very detailed statement of P.W.1 has been recorded.
This apart, P.W.2 in his deposition clearly stated that he was present at the spot at the time of inquest report.
P.W.1 having heard the companyversation went to his sisters house where the deceased and his family were residing.
The evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 is categorical with regard to the participation of each accused in giving blow to the deceased with a particular weapon.
The village Malapalli of Chilakaluripeta is a faction ridden village.
A 1 to A 20, A 22 and A 23 faced the trial.
One group was led by A 6 who belonged to C.P.M party and the deceased who also belonged to C.P.M party led another group.
3rd lumbar vertibra cut.
1727 of 1997 was preferred by Sathuluri Rayappa A 2, Sathuluri Chalapathi A 3, Sathuluri Dibbaraju A 6 and Garapati Mastan A 12.
On 7.4.1992 A 1 and two others stabbed the son of the deceased.
K.SEMA,J 23 accused in all were put to trial before the Trial Court under Sections 148/302/149 IPC.
A deep cut injury of 6X3X8 cms deep in the left lumbar region.
P.W.9 the C.I. took up the investigation and in companyrse of the investigation, statement of prosecution witnesses were recorded, documents companylected and having found that prima facie case was established against the accused, submitted the chargesheet.
18 of 1998 was separately preferred by Satuluri Milke Raju A 14.
Edges clear cut.
Transverse in direction.
It is number disputed that the incident had taken place on 24.7.1992 at 12.30 numbern.
In cross examination P.W.1 categorically stated that P.W.2 Valleru Devadanam was present at the scene during the time of inquest and until the dead body was taken to the hospital.
P.1 at 2.30 p.m. This statement is companyroborated by P.W.8, police head companystable that P.W.1 lodged the FIR at 2.30 p.m. Why and how the FIR lodged at 2.30 p.m. reached the ilaqa Magistrate at 12 mid night should have been explained by the I.O. if such question was put to him.
Thereafter, P.W.1 went to the police station and lodged the report with Head Constable P.W.8 at Town Police Station.
Briefly stated the facts are as follows The accused and the material prosecution witnesses were the residents of village Chilakaluripeta.
The statement of P.W.2 that he was present at the spot at the time of inquest report prepared by the police was companyroborated by the statement of P.W.3 Kondamuthi Bulli Kotamma.
A 21 died before the Trial companymenced.
The external injuries as described by the P.W.7 injury No.1 companyresponds to axe injury caused by A 3, injury No.2 companyresponds to spear injury caused by A 12, external injury No.3 companyresponds to axe injury caused by A 6, external injury No.4 companyresponds to axe injury caused by A 2 and external injury No.5 companyresponds to axe injury caused by A 14.
The deceased Pilli Mohan Rao is the brother in law of another eyewitness P.W.2.
P.1 showed that he received the first information report at 12 mid night.
On deep dissection ecchymosis present.
Eyewitness P.W.1 Pilli Subba Rao is the brother of the deceased.
Then they saw all the accused companying towards them armed with deadly weapons.
It is the prosecution case that Sathuluri Dibbaraju A 6 axed on the back of the deceased, Sathuluri Rayappa A 2 hit him on the left side of the chest, Sathuluri Milke Raju A 14 also axed on the back of the deceased, Sathuluri Chalapathi A 3 beat on the back side of neck of the deceased and Garapati Mastan A 12 speared on the back of the deceased.
He has also stated that he was examined by the police at the scene during the time of inquest and his statement was recorded.
Vertical in direction.
He has categorically stated that W.2 was present at the spot at the time of inquest report.
It is further stated that after the incident P.W.1 and P.W.2 went near the body and found the deceased dead.
On seeing the accused they started running and the accused chased the deceased.
The statement of P.W.2 was further companyroborated by P.W.4 Challa Venkata Hanumanthu Vijaya Kumar, who is a village Administrative Officer and a panch witness to the inquest report.
The High Court doubted the presence of P.W.1 on the ground that he gave the first information report ExP.1 at 2.30 p.m. on 24.7.1992 at the police station which was doubtful because the endorsement of the Magistrate in Ex.
After the said incident, the deceased shifted his family from Malapalli to Sanjeeva Colony in Chilakaluripeta to his sisters house.
W.7 Dr.S.Lalithakumari companyducted the post mortem examination and found the following external injuries on the body of the deceased A cut injury in the occipital region of the head 5cms X 1 cms x bone deep ecchymosis present on deep dissection.
Hence these appeals by special leave by the State of Andhra Pradesh.
By the impugned order the High Court acquitted all of them.
P.W.1 narrated the story to the deceased and asked him to escape.
The deceased Pilli Mohan Rao was also the resident of the same village.
Since 1984 there were several criminal cases against each other among these groups.
On hearing hue and cry of the deceased the neighbours came out, by that time all the accused ran away.
Being aggrieved, two appeals were preferred before the High Court.
Criminal Appeal No.
Criminal Appeal No.
The injury is just below the left nipple.
P.W. 1 categorically stated that he went to the police station and lodged the FIR Ex.
A stab injury in front of the left of the left side of the chest.
Edges are clear cut.
Transverse in direction 4X2X7 cm deep.
Admittedly, on the same day at 7.30 a.m. another murder, that of Pedda Sambaiah who was brother in law of the deceased had taken place and the same case was also investigated by the I.O., P.W.9.
It is the case of the prosecution that on 24.7.1992 at about 7.00 a.m. all the accused persons passed in front of the house of P.W.1 stating that they had killed Pedda Sambaiah and they would kill the deceased Pilli Mohan Rao.
The High Court, has failed to take numbere that in the first information report the name of P.W.2 prominently figures as an eyewitness.
P.W.1 and the deceased then came to Narsaraopet bus stop of Chilakaluripeta.
The injury is transverse in direction.
The other reason assigned by the High Court in recording acquittal of the accused is that P.W.1 and P.W.2 were interested witnesses being relations of deceased and numberindependent witness was examined by the prosecution.
A cut injury of 6X3X7 cms deep in the center of the lumbar region over the 3rd lumber spine.
Ecchymosis present underlying tissues.
Later, on appreciation of evidence and documents companylected during the companyrse of the investigation and having found the case established against the accused during the trial, the Trial Court companyvicted the appellants as aforesaid.
The High Court was, therefore, clearly in error in holding that the delay of FIR reaching ilaqa Magistrate at mid night would throw a suspicion about the presence of P.W.1 and P.W.2.
