Amarsingh Chandra Sathish Kanaka ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 17 September, 2025

[Cites 11, Cited by 0]

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Amarsingh Chandra Sathish Kanaka ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 17 September, 2025

Bench: K Suresh Reddy

1
KSR, J & SRS, J
Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch

APHC010204802018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3547]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 979/2018

Between:

1. KENGAM GANESH, R/O.32ND DIVISION, KOTHAPETA, ELURU,
WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

...APELLANT

AND

1. THE STATE OF AP, rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of
Judicature at Hyderabad for the state of Telangana and the state of
AP.,

...RESPODENT

Appeal under Section 372/374(2)/378(4) of Cr.P.C praying that the High
Court may be pleased to present this memorandum of grounds of criminal
appeal to this Hon'ble Court against the judgment of the 1st Additional
District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru in SC.No. 34 of 2014
dated 12-02-2018 for the following among other grounds.

IA NO: 1 OF 2018

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to suspend the execution of the sentence passed against the
petitioner/accused No.7 in SC.No. 34 of 2014 on the file of the 1st Additional
District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru dated 12-02-2018 and
2
KSR, J & SRS, J
Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch

release the petitioner on bail, pending disposal of the criminal appeal before
this Honourable Court.

IA NO: 1 OF 2020

IA NO: 1 OF 2021

Counsel for the Appellant:

1. B V KRISHNA REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent:

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 995/2018

Between:

1. CHITTI PRASAD, R/O.CHEPALA TUMA CENTRE, 32ND DIVISION,
KOTHAPETA, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

...APELLANT

AND

1. THE STATE OF AP, rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of
Judicature at Hyderabad for the state of Telangana and the state of
AP.,

...RESPODENT

Appeal under Section 372/374(2)/378(4) of Cr.P.C praying that the High
Court may be pleased to to present this memorandum of grounds of Crl.A. to
3
KSR, J & SRS, J
Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch

this Hon'ble Court against the judgment of the 1st Additional District and
Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru in SC.No. 34 of 2014 dated 12-02-
2018 for the following among other grounds.

IA NO: 1 OF 2021

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to release the petitioner/ appellant/A4 on bail pending Crl. Appeal
No.998 of 2018, in this Hon'ble Court and pass such other order may be
deems fit and proper in above circumstances of the case to the satisfaction of
the II AJFCM court, West Godavari District, Eluru, in the interest of justice.

Counsel for the Appellant:

1. B V KRISHNA REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent:

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 1812/2018

Between:

1. KATTIRA SATISH, OCC.CAR DRIVER, R/O.36TH DIVISION,
CHINTACHETTU ROAD, RR.PET, ELURU.

...APELLANT

AND

1. THE STATE OF AP, rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of
Judicature at Hyderabad.

...RESPODENT
4
KSR, J & SRS, J
Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch

Appeal under Section 372/374(2)/378(4) of Cr.P.C praying that the High
Court may be pleased to allow the appeal by setting aside the conviction and
sentence dated 12-02-2018 made in SC.No. 34 of 2014 on the file of the 1st
Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru and
consequently acquit the appellant/A6 herein.

IA NO: 1 OF 2018

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail by suspending the conviction and
sentence dated 12-02-2018 made in SC.No. 34 of 2014 on the file of the 1st
Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru, pending
disposal of the Crl. Appeal.

IA NO: 2 OF 2018

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to condone the delay of 38 days in filing the appeal against the
conviction and sentence dated 12-02-2018 made in SC.No. 34 of 2014 on
the file of the 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari,
Eluru and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem
fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

IA NO: 3 OF 2018

IA NO: 1 OF 2021

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to suspend the execution of the sentence dated 12th February,
2018, passed in S.C.No. 34 of 2014 on the file of I Additional Sessions
Judge, Eluru, West Godavari District, and release the petitioner on bail,
pending disposal of the above Crl.A.No. 1812 of 2018, and pass
5
KSR, J & SRS, J
Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch

Counsel for the Appellant:

1. G VIJAYA SARADHI

Counsel for the Respondent:

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 2012/2018

Between:

1. KANCHI MURALIKRISHNA @ CHINNI KRISHNA, OCC.BUSINESS,
R/O.32ND DIVISION, CHAPALA THUMU CENTRE, KOTHAPETA,
ELURU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

...APELLANT

AND

1. STATE OF AP, rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature
for the state of Telangana and the state of AP.,

...RESPODENT

Appeal under Section 372/374(2)/378(4) of Cr.P.C praying that the High
Court may be pleased to prefer this appeal having been aggrieved by the
conviction and sentence passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, West
Godavari District, Eluru on 12-02-2018 in SC.No. 34 of 2014 imposing
punishment of (1) six months for the charge under section 120(B) R/w. sec.
149 IPC and (2) sec. 149 IPC for the following among other grounds.

IA NO: 1 OF 2018

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to condone the delay of (89) days in preferring the appeal.

IA NO: 1 OF 2021

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to release the Petitioner/Accused No.1 on bail for a period of three
weeks (21days)in Crl.A No. 1374 of 2018 of this Hon'ble Court which arose n
6
KSR, J & SRS, J
Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch

out of S.C.No. 34 of 2014 on the file of 1st Addl. District & Sessions Judge,
West Godavari at Eluru and to pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2021

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to extend the bail granted to the petitioner/A.1 in IA.No. 1 of 2021 in
Crl.A.No. 2012 of 2018 dt.06.05.2021 for a period of two months i.e, from
27.05.2021 to 27.07.2021 in Crl.A.No. 2012 of 2018 of this Hon'ble Court
which arose out of S.C.No. 34 of 2014 on the file of 1st Addl District and
Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru

IA NO: 3 OF 2021

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased

IA NO: 4 OF 2021

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to extend the bail granted to the petitioner/A.1 in I.A.No.3 of 2021 in
CrI.A.No.2012 of 2018 dt.16.09.2021 for a period of six months i.e., from
15.11.2021 to 15.04.2022 in CrI.A.No.2012 of 2018 of this Hon'ble Court
which arose out of S.C. No. 34 of 2014 on the file of 1st Addl. District &
Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru and to pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to release the petitioner/A.1 on bail for a period of six months i.e.,
from 25.02.2022 to 25.08.2022 in CrI.A. No. 2012 of 2018 of this Hon'ble
Court which arose out of S.C. No. 34 of 2014 on the file of 1st Addl. District &
Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru and to pass such other order or
orders which

IA NO: 2 OF 2022

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
7
KSR, J & SRS, J
Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch

pleased to release the petitioner/A.1 on bail for a period of three months i.e.,
from 01.10.2022 to 01.01.2023 in CrI.A. No. 2012 of 2018 of this Hon'ble
Court which arose out of S.C. No. 34 of 2014 on the file of 1st Addl. District &
Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru and to pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to suspend the execution of the sentence fated 12-02-2018, passed
in S.C.No.34 of 2014 on the file of I Additional Sessions Judge, Eluru, West
Godavari District and release the petitioner on bail and to pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to suspend the execution of sentence passed against the
petitioner/accused No.1 viz., Kanchi Murali Krishna @ Chinni Krishna in S.C.
No. 34 of 2014 on the file of 1st Addl. District &Sessions Judge, West
Godavari at Eluru, dt. 12.02.2018 and release the petitioner on bail and to
pass

Counsel for the Appellant:

1. D PURNACHANDRA REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent:

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

The Court made the following:

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 1374/2018

Between:

1. MEESALA DURGA RAO AND ANOTHER, OCC.TENDER BUSINESS,
R/O.32ND DIVISION, CHEPALA TUMU CENTER, KOTHAPET,
ELURU.

2. MOHAMMAD JANI BASHA @ BASHA, BACKSIDE OF
8
KSR, J & SRS, J
Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch

VENKATESWARA SWAMI TEMPLE, CHODDIBBA, YETIGATTU,
44TH DIVISION, ELURU.

...APELLANT(S)

AND

1. STATE OF AP, hrths

...RESPODENT

IA NO: 1 OF 2018

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to enlarge the petitioners/appellants on bail by suspending the
conviction and sentence dated 12-02-2018 made in SC.No. 34 of 2014 on
the file of the 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari,
Eluru, pending disposal of the criminal appeal.

IA NO: 2 OF 2018

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased To enlarge the petitioners on bail by suspending the conviction and
sentence dated 12-02-2018 made in SC.No.34 of 2014, on the file of the I
Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru, pending
disposal of the Crl.Appeal and to pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2021

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to the petitioner prays that the Hon'ble court may be pleased to
release him on interim bail for 5 days i.e., 16-02-2021 to 20-02-2021 in Cr'.
Appeal No. 1374 of 2018 which is pending before this Hon'ble Court and to
pass
9
KSR, J & SRS, J
Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch

IA NO: 2 OF 2021

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to suspend the execution of the sentence dated 12th, February,
2018, passed in S.C.No. 34 of 2014 on the file of I Additional district
Sessions Judge, Eluru, West Godavari District, and release the petitioner on
bail, pending disposal of the above Crl.A.No. 1374 of 2018, and to

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to release the petitioner/accused No.3 viz., Meesala Durga Rao, on
bail for a period of 7 days from 29.01.2022 to 05.01.2022 in Crl. A. No.
1374/2018 of this Hon'ble Court which arose out of S.C.No.34 of 2014 on the
file of the I Addl. District and Sessions Judge at Eluru, West Godavari
District(subject matter of Cr. No. 174 of 2012 of II Town Law & Order Police
Station, Eluru, West Godavari District) and to pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to suspend the execution of the sentence dated 12-02-2018 passed
in SC No. 34 of 2014 on the file of I Additional Sessions Judge Eluru West
Godavari District and release the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the
above Crl.A.No. 1374 of 2018 and to pass

Counsel for the Appellant(S):

1. G VIJAYA SARADHI

Counsel for the Respondent:

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

The Court made the following:
10
KSR, J & SRS, J
Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 38/2021

Between:

1. AMARSINGH CHANDRA SATHISH KANAKA RAMMOHANA RAO @
PURI,, S/O. DURGA RAO, AGED 24 YEARS, T.KAPU, HOTEL
DURGA PRAVEEN FAST FOODS, NEAR RAILWAY GATE, POWER
PET, ELURU, R/O. DR. CHENNAKESAVULA RANGA RAO
HOSPITAL STREET, POWER PET, ELURU.

...APELLANT

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Judicature at Amaravathi.

...RESPODENT

Appeal under Section 372/374(2)/378(4) of Cr.P.C praying that the High
Court may be pleased to appellant begs to present this Memorandum of
Criminal Appeal aggrieved by the judgment passed in S.C.No. 34 of 2014
dated 12th February, 2018 on the file of the court of I Additional District and
Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru

IA NO: 1 OF 2021

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to condone the delay of 667 days in filing the Crl. Appeal against the
judgment passed in S.C.No.. 34 of 2014 on the file of 1st Additional District
and Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru, Dated 12th February, 2018
and to pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2021

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to dispense with the production of the Certified Copy of the
Judgment copy in S.C.No. 34 of 2014 Dated: 12-02-2018 on the file of the
court of the I Additional Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru, and to pass

IA NO: 3 OF 2021
11
KSR, J & SRS, J
Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to suspend the execution of the sentence dated 12th, February,
2018, passed in S.C.No. 34 of 2014 on the file of I Additional Sessions
Judge, Eluru, West Godavari District, and release the petitioner on bail,
pending disposal of the above Crl.A.No. 38 of 2021, and pass

Counsel for the Appellant:

1. G VIJAYA SARADHI

Counsel for the Respondent:

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

The Court made the following:
12
KSR, J & SRS, J
Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

WEDNESDAY, THIS THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

SPECIAL DIVISION BENCH

PRESENT

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY
And
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos.979, 995, 1812, 2012, 1374 OF 2018 AND
38 OF 2021

COMMON JUDGMENT:

(Per Justice K. Suresh Reddy) As all the Criminal Appeals arise out of the same Sessions Case i.e., S.C.No.34 of 2014 on the file of the Court of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Eluru, West Godavari District, they are taken up together and are being disposed of by way of this common judgment.

2. A.1 in S.C.No.34 of 2014 on the file of the Court of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru is the appellant in Crl.A.No.2012 of 2018; A.3 and A.5 are the appellants in Crl.A.No.1374 of 2018; A.4 is the appellant in Crl.A.No.995 of 2018; A6 is the appellant in Crl.A.No.1812 of 2018; A.7 is the appellant in Crl.A.No.979 of 2018 and A.8 is the appellant in Crl.A.No.38 of 2021. Even before framing of charges, A.2 died and case against him was abated. A1, A3 to A8 were tried by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, under the following charges; 13

KSR, J & SRS, J Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch First charge was under Section 120-B read with 149 IPC against A.1 and A.3 to A.8.

Second charge was under Section 341 IPC against A.4. Third charge was under Section 302 read with 149 IPC against A.1 and A.3 to A.8.

3. Substance of the charge is that, prior to 09.7.2012, all the accused conspired to do away with the life of one Botta Gangadhara Rao (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) and in pursuance of the conspiracy, on the intervening night of 09/10.7.2012, between 11.00 p.m. and 12.00 midnight, A.4 restrained the deceased at Deevanam road, Tilak Nagar, Tangellamudi of Eluru Town and poured chilli powder on his face and they caused the death of the deceased by hitting him with iron rods on his head, thereby they committed offences punishable under Section 120-B read with 149 IPC, 341 and 302 r/w 149 IPC.

4. After completion of trial, the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge convicted the appellants under Section 120-B read with 149 IPC and sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six (06) months. Learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge convicted A.4 under Section 341 IPC and sentenced him to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one (01) month. Learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge convicted all the appellants under Section 302 read with 149 IPC and sentenced each one of them to undergo imprisonment for 'LIFE' and also to 14 KSR, J & SRS, J Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) each in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of three (03) months. All the substantive sentences were directed to be run concurrently.

5. Case of the prosecution, as emanated from the evidence of prosecution witnesses, briefly, is as follows:

All the accused are residents of Eluru Town. A.1 and A.2 are own brothers. A.3 and A.4 are relatives of A.1 and A2. A.5 and A.8 are friends of A.1 and A.2. Whereas A.6 is the friend of A.4. A.7 is the co-brother of A.2.

All the material prosecution witnesses are residents of Eluru Town. The deceased was also resident of Eluru Town.

i) Earlier, one Chitti Satish who is the brother-in-law of A.1 and A.2, attempted to commit murder of one Barla Krishna who is the maternal uncle of the deceased. In the month of March, 2008, the deceased herein along with others caused the death of said Chitti Satish. The deceased herein was shown as A.2 in the said case. Since then, there was enmity between both groups. As such A.1 and A.2 conspired with A.3 to A.8 to eliminate the deceased as they were responsible for the death of Chitti Satish.

ii) Subsequently, some mediations took place between both the groups with the help of P.W.8 and P.W.9. But the mediations failed. The deceased was attending to Court in Chitti Satish's murder case.

iii) While so, on the intervening night of 09/10.7.2012 at about 11.00 p.m, the deceased along with P.Ws 1 to 3 consumed liquor at the shop of 15 KSR, J & SRS, J Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch L.W.15. Having come to know about the presence of the deceased, all the accused went to Deevanam Road in an auto bearing registration no.AP 37 W 2063 belonging to A.4. A.1 to A.3 and A.5 were waiting in the auto and A.4 waited outside. At about 12.00 midnight, the deceased and P.W.2 were proceeding on motorcycle after consuming alcohol. P.Ws 1 and 3 were proceeding on another motorcycle. P.W.1 dropped P.W.3 at his house and while the deceased along with P.Ws 1 and 2 proceeding to their house on two motorcycles and when they reached near Deevanam Road, A.4 way laid the deceased and sprinkled chilli powder on his face. Immediately, the other accused came out from the auto and attacked the deceased with iron rods on the head. The deceased succumbed to injuries on the spot.

iv) P.W.1 having witnessed the incident went to the house of the deceased and knocked the door and as there was no response from the inmates, he went to his house where his family members advised him to give report to the police.

v) At about 3.00 a.m on 10.7.2012, he went to the police station and gave a report. P.W.15 Police constable, II town police station, Eluru received information from P.W.1. P.W.15 drafted Ex.P.1 report as per the dictation of P.W.1. At the same time, P.W.14 Sub Inspector of Police, Eluru II town Police Station, having received intimation, went to the police station and received Ex.P.1 and registered a case in Crime No.174/2012 under Section 16 KSR, J & SRS, J Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch 120-B, 341, 302 read with 149 IPC. He issued copies of F.I.R to all the concerned. F.I.R. is marked as Ex.P.14.

vi) Having received the information from P.W.14, P.W.16 Deputy Superintendent of Police visited the police station and took up investigation.

He recorded statements of P.Ws 1 and 2. He secured the presence of P.W.14 and P.W.10 and visited the scene of offence. He got the scene photographed through P.W.12. He also prepared rough sketch Ex.P.15 at the scene of offence. He recorded statements of other witnesses and seized blood stained earth, controlled earth and slippers at the scene of offence. They were marked as M.Os 2,4 and 5. He also seized two motorcycles at the scene of offence at about 10.00 a.m. on 10.7.2012.

vii) P.W.16 held inquest over the dead body in the presence of P.W.10. Inquest report is marked as Ex.P.6. He sent the dead body for postmortem examination. P.W.13 Civil Assistant Surgeon, Government Hospital, Eluru conducted autopsy over the dead body. He opined the cause of death was due to neurogenic shock and Hemorrhage. He issued Ex.P.13 postmortem certificate.

viii) On 26.7.2012 P.W.16 apprehended A.1 to A5 at bye-pass road in the presence of P.W.10 and others. On the confession made by arrested accused, he seized M.O.9 iron rods and M.O.10 clothes at Government hydraulic project antenna situated near Food Corporation of India godown under a panchanama Ex.P.8 in the presence of P.W.10 and others. 17

KSR, J & SRS, J Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch

ix) On the same day A.6 to A.8 approached P.W.11 and confessed before him stating that they committed murder of the deceased and they wanted to surrender before police through him. Thereafter P.W.11 prepared a report and handed over them to P.W.16 at about 2.00 p.m. P.W.16 arrested A.6 to A.8 under Ex.P.10. Thereafter A.1 to A.8 were remanded to judicial custody on 28.7.2012. P.W.16 recorded statements of other witnesses. He sent all the material objects to R.F.S.L. R.F.S.L. report is marked as Ex.P.16. After receiving all the documents and after completion of investigation, P.W.16 filed charge sheet.

6. In support of its case, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 16, got marked Exs.P.1 to P.16 and exhibited MOs.1 to 10. On behalf of defence, Ex.D.1 was marked.

7. When all the accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., they denied the incriminating evidence appearing against them.

8. Heard Sri. B.V.Krishna Reddy, Sri G.Vijaya Saradhi and Sri D.Purnachandra Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Sri M.Venkata Ramana, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent- State.

9. Learned counsel appearing for the accused/appellants strenuously contends that absolutely there is no legal evidence to connect the appellants with the alleged offence. It is further contended that in Ex.P.1 report, the names of A.1 to A.3 were referred along with one Pola Kiran. It is contended 18 KSR, J & SRS, J Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch that no role has been attributed to A.4 to A.8. Even their names also have not been referred in Ex.P.1 report.

10. It is further contended that out of two witnesses i.e. P.Ws 1 and 2, P.W.2 did not support the prosecution. It is further contended that, so far as P.W.1 is concerned, he is not a reliable witness and no reliance can be placed on his testimony. It is contended that P.W.1 went to the extent of dis- owning Ex.P.1. Except the evidence of P.W.1, whose evidence is not trustworthy, there is no other corroborating evidence to the prosecution version. As such learned counsel for the appellants request this Court to set aside the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge and allow the appeals.

11. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the appeals contending that quantity of the witnesses does not matter. Even if one eye witness is there, conviction can be recorded, provided his evidence inspire confidence of the Court. He further contended that the evidence of P.W.1 who is an eye witness clearly depose as to the manner in which the accused attacked the deceased. As such he requests this Court to dismiss the appeals by confirming the conviction and sentence.

12. We have carefully analyzed the entire evidence on record.

13. P.W.1 in his earliest report Ex.P.1 has referred to the names of only A.1 to A.4 and one Pola Kiran. Of course, the name of said Pola Kiran was deleted from the charge sheet by the police as his involvement was not 19 KSR, J & SRS, J Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch revealed during the course of investigation. Further, he referred the names of A.1 to A.4 in Ex.P.1. He did not attribute any specific overt act against A.1 to A.3. So far as A.4 is concerned, P.W.1 attributed overt acts stating that he threw chilli powder on the face of the deceased. But the said fact of throwing chilli powder was not corroborated by the medical evidence as the Doctor P.W.13 did not find any traces of chilli powder. During the course of trial, P.W.1 in his evidence in chief attributed overt acts on A.2 and A.4 alone. So far as A.1 is concerned, P.W. 1 did not state anything in his evidence.

14. As already pointed out, the overt act attributed to A.4 was found to be false in view of the evidence of medical officer P.W.13. So far as A.2 is concerned, as already stated, A2 died even before framing of charges. The only overt act attributed by P.W.1 in his evidence is A.3 beat the deceased with iron rod. In the cross-examination, P.W.1 has stated as follows:

"I do not know personally how the deceased Gangadhar Rao died. It is not true to suggest that I was present by the time of offence. It is not true to suggest that I cannot say who committed and involved in the said offence."

At another stage in the cross-examination, P.W.1 admitted as follows:

"I do not know who drafted Ex.P.1 report and also do not know the contents of Ex.P.1 report. It is true there was difference of thumb impression on page no.3 of Ex.P.1 and page no.3 of Ex.P.14."

Of course, the version of the defence was, that the deceased was going on his motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner by consuming alcohol and met with an accident. The same thing was suggested to P.W.1 20 KSR, J & SRS, J Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch and also to the medical officer P.W.13. P.W.13 in his cross-examination has stated as follows:

"There may be possibility or may not be possibility for sustaining head injury by driving a motorcycle and hit it in a blunt object."

As such the stand of the defence was that the deceased met with an accident and died on the spot. P.W.13 Medical Officer also stated in his evidence and also in postmortem report Ex.P.13 that there is only one injury on the head of the deceased. If really all the accused beat the deceased indiscriminately with iron rods, deceased might have received more than one injury. But the Doctor in his evidence has stated that the deceased received only one injury on his head. So far as the evidence of P.Ws 5 to 7 who are mother, wife and brother of the deceased concerned, their evidence is not at all helpful to the prosecution except to show that there was enmity between the deceased and the accused.

15. As already pointed out, P.W.2 did not support the prosecution. P.W.4 also did not support the prosecution. So far as P.W.3 is concerned, even according to the prosecution, P.W.1 left him at his house and went away. As such except the evidence of P.W.1, there is no evidence available on record. As already pointed out, P.W.1 in his evidence gave divergent versions. In the cross-examination he went to the extent of dis-owning Ex.P1. He also stated in his cross-examination that, he does not know as to how the deceased died. As such the evidence of P.W.1 does not inspire confidence. 21

KSR, J & SRS, J Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch

16. Coming to the arrest of A.1 to A.5 and recovery of material objects, the prosecution examined P.W.10 Village Revenue Officer as a punch witness. P.W.10 in his evidence has stated that A1 to A5 were apprehended at about 06.00 a.m at Eluru bye-pass road. On the confession made by A.1 to A.5, P.W.16 recovered M.O.9 eight iron rods near Food Corporation of India godown. But mediator P.W.10 in his cross-examination admitted that M.O.9 iron rods were brought by the accused from the shop of A.1 and A.2. He further admitted in his cross-examination that he drafted as many as 50 panchanamas in his career. In view of the said statement made by P.W.10, no reliance can be placed on the so called arrest and seizure of A.1 to A.5.

17. Coming to the arrest of A.6 to A.8, P.W.11 another Village Revenue Officer was projected as the person before whom A.6 to A.8 made extra judicial confession. But P.W.11 was a stranger to A.6 to A.8. As such no reliance can be placed on the so called extra judicial confession. Of course, the learned trial Judge also accepted that no reliance can be placed on the so called extra judicial confession. But curiously, though there was no legal evidence on record, the learned trial Judge convicted the appellants by observing as follows:

"So, from the above discussions and the evidence available on record and the material objects produced before the Court observed that there is a motive behind back in committing the murder of the deceased due to previous enmity and these elements sufficiently substantiated by the prosecution through P.Ws.1 to 16. Hence, the accused are liable for conviction as per law. Though one of the eyewitness did not stated the 22 KSR, J & SRS, J Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch names of all the accused, their names are disclosed other material in record, it cannot be said that all the accused are not participated in the incident since all the accused attacked the deceased by forming into a mob, armed with deadly weapons. In that view of the matter, it is difficult to the human being to depose the name of each assailant. But, the fact remains is that the confessional statements made by the accused at the time of their arrest, recovery of the material objects and the previous grudges prevailed between the group headed by A-1 and A-2 and the group headed by the deceased, it can be easily said that all the accused headed by A - 1 and A - 2 brutally murdered the deceased.

The manner in which the accused perpetrated the crime would indicate that the accused with an intention to kill the deceased, conspired together, and in furtherance of their criminal common/intention, committed a riotous attack with lethal weapons, caused fatal injuries to the deceased and thereby killed him. Hence, participation of all the accused in the above offence cannot be ruled out. Therefore, I have no hesitation to hold that the accused are guilty of the offence punishable under Sections with which they are charged as the prosecution proved the said offences beyond all reasonable doubt. Accordingly, I hold that the prosecution is able to prove the guilt of the accused:

A - 1 A - 3 to A - 8 for the offence punishable under Section 120-B r/w 149 of IPC;

A-4 for the offence punishable under Section 341 of IPC; and A-1, A - 3 to A-8 under Section 302 r/w 149 of IPC.

Case against A-2 is abated since died.

Accordingly, A-1, A - 3 to A - 8 are convicted for the said charges under Section 235(2) of Cr.P.C.

The above reasoning given by the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru, is not sustainable under law. 23

KSR, J & SRS, J Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch

18. Having analyzed the entire evidence carefully, particularly the evidence of P.W.1, we have no hesitation to come to the conclusion that the prosecution miserably failed in establishing guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

19. In the result, all the Criminal Appeals are allowed setting aside the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru in S.C.No.34 of 2014, dated 12.02.2018. Accordingly, all the appellants/accused are acquitted of all the charges. Fine amount, if any, paid by the appellants/accused shall be refunded to them. As all the appellants/accused are on bail, they are directed to surrender before the trial Court and complete the formalities in terms of the orders of the combined High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Batchu Rangarao and others vs. State of Andhra Pradesh1.

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

________________________ JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 17.9.2025 RD 1 {2016(3)ALT (Criminal) 505(DB)(AP)} 24 KSR, J & SRS, J Crl.A.Nos.979 of 2018 and batch HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY And HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos.979, 995, 1812, 2012, 1374 OF 2018 AND 38 OF 2021 (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice K.Suresh Reddy) Date: 17.9.2025 RD

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati