Mallildi
Satyanarayana Reddy Vs. State of A.P. & Ors. [2008] INSC 2133 (11 December
2008)
Judgment
CRIMINAL APPELLATE
JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.556 OF 2001 Mallidi Satyanarayana Reddy
...Appellant(s) Versus State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. ...Respondent(s) O R
D E R Heard learned counsel for the parties.
In the present case,
seven accused persons, including Mallidi Satyanarayana Reddy [A-3], appellant
herein, were charge-sheeted. Accused V. Venkateswara Rao [A-2] died during
trial and trial in relation to accused A.B. Andrews Paul @ Rajan [A-5] was
separated as he was declared absconder. Out of remaining five accused persons,
accused S. Subba Rao [A-4], V. Nanda Gopal [A-6] and K. Hari [A-7] were
acquitted by the Trial Court. So far as remaining two accused persons, namely,
K. Venkateswara Rao [A-1] and Mallidi Satyanarayana Reddy [A-3], are concerned,
K. Venkateswara Rao [A-1] was convicted under Section 420 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860 [hereinafter referred to as "I.P.C."] and sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay fine of
Rupees four thousand; in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for
a period of six months and Mallidi Satyanarayana Reddy [A-3] was convicted
under Section 420 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a
period of two years and to pay fine of Rupees four thousand; in default, to
undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of five months. Mallidi
Satyanarayana Reddy [A-3] was further convicted under Section 471 I.P.C. and
was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and
to pay fine of Rupees one thousand; in default, to undergo further imprisonment
for a period of six months. Both the sentences were, however, ordered to run
concurrently.
Against the order of
acquittal, no appeal was preferred by the State whereas, on appeal being
preferred by A-1 and A-3, Sessions Court upheld their convictions whereafter a
revision application was filed before the High Court, which has been dismissed
by the impugned order. Against their convictions, A-1 and A-3 filed special
leave petitons before this Court. So far as K. Venkateswara Rao [A-1] is
concerned, special leave petition filed by him was dismissed whereas leave was
granted in relation to Mallidi Satyanarayana Reddy [A-3].
Having heard learned
counsel for the parties and perused the records, we are of the view that the
Trial Court as well as the Appellate Court convicted the appellant upon
threadbare discussion of evidence and the High Court has not committed any
error in refusing to interfere with the same.
The appeal fails and
the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
Bail bonds of the
appellant, who is on bail, are cancelled and he is directed to be taken into
custody forthwith to serve out the remaining period of sentence for which the
matter must be reported to this Court within two months from the date of
receipt/production of copy of this order.
......................J.
[B.N. AGRAWAL]
......................J.
[G.S. SINGHVI]
New
Delhi,
December
11, 2008.
Back
Pages: 1 2 3
