Abbulu & Ors Vs. State of A.P  Insc 186 (8 April 2002)
Sethi & K.G. Balakrishnan K.G. Balakrishnan, J.
persons were charge-sheeted before the Court of Sessions, East Godavari
Division at Rajahmundry in Andhra Pradesh, for offences
punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and for other allied
offences. One accused, by name, Rachapalli Bhanuraju was absconding and his
case was separated and only 17 persons were tried by the Court. Out of them, Sundarapalli
Apparao (A4), Sundarapalli Kama Raju (A5), Vajrapu Satyanarayana (A9), Ghetla Veeraraju
(A13), Chetla Suribabu (A14) and A17 were acquitted of all charges.
(A7) was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 324 IPC
for causing injury to the wife of Thota Abbayi (D-2). Rachapalli Abbulu (A2), Chakkidala
Nageswara Rao (A3), Nitta Subbarao (A6), Chakkidala Papamma (A8), Mokamati Jayara
(A10), Mokamati Satyanarayana (A11), Sundarapalli Veeraraju (A15) and Sanku Daveedu
Raju (A18), were found guilty of offences under Section 302 read with Section
149 IPC for having caused the death of Thota Nagaraju (Deceased 1) and Rachapalli
Abbulu (A2), Chakkidala Nageswara Rao (A3), Mokamati Jayara (A10), Mokamati Satyanarayana
(A11), Injamalla Yesudasa (A12), Arella Bhadra Rao (A16) and Sanku Daveedu Raju
(A18) were found guilty of the offences under Section 302 read with Section 149
IPC for having caused the death of Thota Abbayi (Deceased 2). In all, 10
accused persons were found guilty of the offences punishable under Section 302
read with Section 149, IPC. They went up in appeal before the High Court and by
the impugned judgment their appeals were dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the
present appeals are preferred. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are thus.
appellants and the two deceased persons belonged to the same community, but
they led two different factions. One group was under the leadership of deceased
Thota Nagaraju (D-1) and the other group was led by absconding first accused Rachapalli
Bhanaraju. All these persons were the residents of Patha Peddapuram village.
There used to be frequent quarrels between these two groups of persons and some
criminal cases were registered against them. In view of frequent quarrels
between these two groups, a police picket was posted in the locality.
due to the parliamentary elections in the area, the armed police picket was
withdrawn from the village on 25.12.1984. Taking advantage of this situation,
on 27.12.1984 at about 1
p.m., the accused
persons came to the residence of Thota Nagaraju (D-1). At that time Thota Nagaraju
(D-1) was sitting in the verandah of his house and was taking his mid-day meal.
All the accused persons, armed with spears, knives and sticks started attacking
him. Thota Nagaraju (D-1) tried to run away, but he was chased and surrounded
by the accused. According to the prosecution, Rachapalli Bhanuraju (A1) and Rachapalli
Abbulu (A2) caused various injuries on the body of Thota Nagaraju (D-1). PW2,
the wife of Thota Nagaraju (D-1), tried to intervene in order to rescue her
husband, but she was also beaten up by Rachapalli Abbulu (A2). After causing
injuries to Thota Nagaraju (D-1), the accused went to the house of his brother Thota
Abbayi (D-2). On seeing the group of persons, Thota Abbayi (D-2) ran away to a
nearby public lavatory, but all the accused persons managed to drag him out of
the lavatory and caused multiple injuries on his person. The accused persons
also caused injuries to the wife of Thota Abbayi (D-2).
about 1.30 P.M., the Sub-Inspector of Police, Peddampuram, [PW-19] received
information regarding the incident. He immediately rushed to the place of
occurrence and found the two dead bodies lying there. He recorded Ex. P-1
statement made by PW-1 and returned to the police station and registered Crime
No. 210/1984 at Peddampuram Police Station. PW-20, the Inspector of Police, Peddampuram,
who was on election duty, reached the place of incident at 3.30 PM and took
over the investigation. He inspected the scene of offence and prepared a sketch
of the same. He held inquest over the dead body of the two deceased persons.
PW-2 and PW-3, who were injured, were examined by Assistant Surgeon attached to
Peddampuram Govt. Hospital and issued Ex. P-8 & P-9 wound certificates.
PW-15 Assistant Surgeon conducted the post mortem examination on the body of
deceased Thota Nagaraju, while PW-16 conducted the post-mortem examination on
the body of deceased Thota Abbayi. Multiple ante-mortem injuries were found on
both the dead bodies.
9.1.1985, accused A2 to A6, A11, A15, A16 & A18 were arrested. Later, the
other accused were also arrested. The first accused, however, was reported
absconding. Charge sheet was filed against all the accused. On the prosecution
side PW1 to PW20 were examined and on the defence side DW1 to DW3 were
examined. Out of the prosecution witnesses, PW1 to PW10 were examined as eye
Merry, is the daughter of deceased Thota Nagaraju. She deposed that A-1, A-2,
A-6 & A-15 caused injuries on deceased Nagaraju by knife and other weapons.
She also deposed that A-2 & A-11 beat her mother, PW-2. PW-2, Thota Appayamma,
is the wife of deceased Thota Nagaraju. She also narrated the entire incident
and deposed that she had seen A-2, A-6, A-15 and A-3 causing injuries to
deceased Thota Nagaraju. Evidence of these two witnesses is further
corroborated by PW-5 Bathiya Yohan, PW-6 Nuthalapati China Apparao and PW-7 Thota
Daveedu. PW-10 also deposed regarding the entire incident. As regards injuries
caused to deceased Thota Abbayi, PW-3 and PW-4, in their depositions, gave
details regarding the injuries caused to the deceased. Their evidence also is
fully supported by PW-5, PW-6, PW-7 and PW-10.
evidence of the eye witnesses is fully corroborated by the medical evidence
that the two deceased persons sustained extensive injuries. The evidence of
PW-15, Dr. (Mrs.) Swarnalatha, who conducted the post mortem examination on the
body of Thota Nagaraju, shows that D-2 had sustained as many as 21 injuries on
his body. Most of these injuries were incised wounds and both bones of the left
hand of the deceased were completely cut off at the wrist joints. PW-15 also
examined injured PW-2, Thota Appayamma, who had sustained two contusions, one
on the right elbow joint and the other on the right back of the chest at the
infra scapular region.
Dr. P. Subbarao, conducted the post mortem examination on the body of deceased Thota
Abbayi. He had also sustained as many as 12 injuries on his body and most of
the injuries were incised wounds. Injury no. 3 was on the right side of the
neck just 2-1/2" below the injury no. 2 and carotid arteries and internal
jugular veins were cut.
the extent of injuries sustained by the two deceased persons, it is clear that
the ocular version given by the various witnesses is true and correct.
is overwhelming evidence on the prosecution side to show that the appellants
came to the place of incident in a group and caused various injuries to
deceased Thota Nagaraju and Thota Abbayi. These witnesses were extensively
cross-examined, but nothing could be brought out in their evidence to show that
they were either not present or that they had not seen the incident. Their
evidence also would show that most of the accused were armed with various
deadly weapons and that they had come to the scene of occurrence with the
purpose to cause the death of the two deceased persons and to cause injuries to
others. It is proved beyond doubt that the appellants formed themselves into an
unlawful assembly and their common object was clearly discernible from the way
in which they caused the death of the two deceased persons.
side examined DW-1, a notary public who gave evidence to the effect that PW-1
to PW-10 had visited his office and sworn to affidavits, the contents of which
were read out by him to these witnesses and that those affidavits were filed
before the Sessions Court.
was a Municipal Councilor, who claimed to have identified these witnesses
is a finger print expert who was examined to prove the thumb impression of
these witnesses in the various affidavits filed before the court. In these
affidavits, PW-1 to PW-10 had stated that they did not see the occurrence.
However, when confronted with the affidavits, these witnesses denied them and
chose to depose before the court. The practice adopted by the defence side in
getting the affidavits of these witnesses in advance is to be deprecated.
in a way, amounts to an attempt aimed at dissuading the witnesses from speaking
truth before the court. The trial Judge as well as the High Court rightly
rejected the defence contention. These witnesses appear to be illiterate
persons. Their so-called affidavits must have been either cooked-up or obtained
by playing a fraud on them. This type of interference in the criminal justice
shall not be encouraged and is to be viewed seriously.
was some semblance of doubt regarding the presence of some of the accused at
the place of occurrence and those accused were given the benefit of doubt by
the Sessions Court.
not find any reason to interfere with the findings recorded by the Sessions
Courts, which were affirmed by the High Court. These appeals are without any
merits and are dismissed accordingly. The appellants who are on bail shall
surrender to their bail bonds to serve out the remaining sentence.
R.P. Sethi ] .J [ K.G. Balakrishnan ] April 8, 2002.