Nagamalleswara Rao & Anr Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh  INSC 128 (26 February 1998)
Nanavati, V.N. Khare Nanavati,J.
Criminal Appeal No. 8/91.
these appeal arise out of the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in
Criminal Appeal No. 1031/87.
Appeal No. 691/90 if filed by S. Nagamalleswara (A- 3) and S. Babu Rao (A-4). Criminal
Appeal No. 8/91 is filed by V. Mankyala Rao (A-2).
appellants have been convicted under Section 302 IPC for causing death of K. Sivaramakrishnaiah.
Their conviction is based upon the evidence of PWs.1, 2 and 3 and the two dying
declarations - Ex.P.15 and Ex.P.13. The High Court confirmed their conviction
mainly relying upon the two dying declarations. It held that though PWs.1, 2
and 3 are partisan witnesses their evidence could be utilised for the purpose
counsel for the appellants was not able to point out how PWs.2 and 3 who were
not related to the deceased could be regarded as partisan witnesses. As their
services were hired for the day for cultivating his land they were with the
deceased while he was returning from his field and when the incident took
place. Nothing was brought on record to show that they has any enmity with the
deceased. The trial court had rightly placed reliance upon their evidence. As
stated earlier, the High Court has also relied upon their evidence though for
the purpose of corroboration. The dying declaration Ex.P.15 was recorded by the
Investigation officer at about 7.15 p.m. and
Ex.P.13 was recorded by the Judicial Magistrate at about 9.30 p.m. Both the dying declarations have been found as
genuine and true and nothing could be urged by the learned counsel for taking a
contrary view. The evidence of PWs.2 and 3 and the two dying declarations
Ex.P.15 and Ex.P.13 clearly establish that the appellants were responsible for
causing the death of K. Sivaramakrishnaiah.
contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that as no injuries were
caused on the vital parts of the deceased, they should not have convicted under
Section 302 IPC. This contention cannot be accepted because the medical
evidence clearly shows that the deceased has died due to the injuries caused to
him and the injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause
not on the vital parts, the injuries caused were serious. Therefore, the
appellants have been rightly convicted under Section 302 read with 34 IPC.
find that they have been rightly convicted these appeals are dismissed.
appellants were released on bail during the pendency of these appeal. Their
bail is cancelled and they are ordered to surrender to custody to serve out the
remaining part of their sentence.