Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Rayapalli Someswara Rao Somu vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 8 July, 2025
Author: K Suresh Reddy
Bench: K Suresh Reddy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY
AND
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS: 1478. 1481, 1562. 1667 AND 1752 OF 2017
AND 755, 1071. 1072 & 2342 OF 2018
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 1478 OF 2017
APHC010986602017
V
Appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., against the Judgment of I
Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru in S.C.No.
203 of 2012 dated 30-10-2017.
Between:
1. Laveti Stalinbabu @ Stalin, S/o. Bhaskararao, aged about 25 years,
Occ: Auto Driver, R/o. Near Meesala Appanna Temple, 41, Division,
Kotha Pet, Eluru. (A-7)
2. Arji Siva Sankar Kumar @ Siva, S/o. Satya, aged about 27 years,
Occ: Representative of Coca-Cola Company, Opposite to TATA Cell
Tower, Kandrikagudem, Eluru. (A-8)
...Appellants/Accused
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by Public Prosecutor, High Court
of Andhra Pradesh.
...Respondent
Counsel for the Petitioner No.1: Sri B V Krishna Reddy
Counsel for the Petitioner No.2: Sri T Nagarjuna Reddy
Counsel for the Respondent: Public Prosecutor
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 1481 OF 2017
APHC010964882017
Appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., aggrieved by the Common
dated:
Judgment passed in S.C.No.203/2012 and S.C.No.223/2017
30.10.2017 by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, West
Godavari District, Eluru.
Between:
Jagurothula Satyanaryana @ Solution Sathi, S/o. Ramulu, Occ:Jute
Mill Worker, Gangula Pet, Ganganamma Temie Street, Kotha Pet,
Eluru, W.G. Dist.
...Appellant/Accused No.12
AND
state of Andhra Pradesh, thorugh SHO., Eluru-ll Town (L&O) PS
W.G.Dist rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Amaravati.
...Respondent/Complainant
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri G L Nageswar Rao
Counsel for the Respondent: Public Prosecutor
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 1562 OF 2017
APHC010962202017
Appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., aggrieved by the Judgment
dated; 30.10.2017 in SC No. 203 of 2012 on the file of I Additional District
& Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru.
Between:
1. Barla Krishna, S/o. Ramulu, Hindu, Male, Aged 41 years, R/o.
Chodidibba Village, Tangellamudi, Eluru Mandal, West Godavari
District.
2. Barla Pydiraju, S/o. Ramana, Hindu, Male, Aged 24 years, R/o.
Sriramnagar Colony, 7th Road, Venkatapuram Panchayat, Eluru,
West Godavari District.
...Appellants/Accused No.1 and 5
AND
State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High court of
A.P., Amaravati.
...Respondent
Counsel for the Petitioners: Dr Challa Srinivasa Reddy
Counsel for the Respondent: Public Prosecutor (AP)
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 1667 OF 2017
APHC010946492017
Appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., against the Judgment dated
30-10-2017 made in S.C.No.203 of 2012 on the file of The I Additional
District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari :: Eluru.
Between:
Rayapalli Someswara Rao @ Somu, S/o Papinaidu, K. Velama,
Lavethivari Street, 41 Division, Kotha Pet, Eluru.
...Appellant/AccusedNo.9
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Public Prosecutor,
For the State of Andhra Pradesh.
...Respondent
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri M.Thirumal Rao
Counsel for the Respondent: Public Prosecutor
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 1752 OF 2017
APHC011037592017
Appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., against the Judgment dated
30-10-2017 made in S.C.No.203 of 2012 and SC No.223 of 2017 on the
file of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari :: Eluru.
Between:
Kurumilli Dhanunjayarao @ Dhana, S/o. Narasimhulu, 21 years,
Near Alekhyamma Temple, Lavetivari Street, Kothapet Eluru, Now
Central Prison, Rajamahendravaram C.T. No. 6157
...Appellant/A-11
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Inspector of Police, Eluru II
Town L & O Police Station, West Godavari District, through Public
Prosecutor, High Court Buildings, Amarvati.
...Respondent
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri G Vijaya Saradhi
Counsel for the Respondent: Public Prosecutor
CmMINAL APPEAL NO: 755 OF 2018
APHC010122112018
Appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., aggrieved by the order made
in SC No.203/2012 and SC 223/2017 dt 30-10-2017 on the file of the 1st
Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari District at Eluru.
Between:
Botta Durga Rao, S/o B Sambasiva Rao, C.T No.6151, Aged about
25 years. Lorry Tinkering Worker, R/o Srirama Nagar Colony, 7th
Road, Venkatapuram Gram Panchayat, Eluru, West Godavari
District.
...Accused No.4/Appellant
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High
Court at Amaravati.
...Respondent
Counsel for the Petitioner: Smt. Nitta Swarnalatha
Counsel for the Respondent: Public Prosecutor
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 1071 OF 2018
APHC011041262017
Appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C,, against the Judgment of I
Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru in SC.No.
203 of 2012 dated 30-10-2017.
Between:
Pacherla Atcharao @ Atchuth, Auto Driver, AP 37 W 2091
...Appellant/Accused No.14
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Public Prosecutor,
state of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati.
...Respondent
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri M K Raj Kumar
Counsel for the Respondent: Public Prosecutor
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 1072 OF 2018
APHC011041322017
Appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., against the judgment of I
Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru in SC.No.
203 of 2012 dated 30-10-2017.
[,
Between:
Barla Vijay, S/o. Appa Rao, Yadava, Chodidibba, Near Peda
Ramalayam, Eluru.
...Petitioner
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Public Prosecutor
State of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati.
...Respondent
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri M K Raj Kumar
Counsel for the Respondent: Public Prosecutor
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 2342 OF 2018
APHC010583552018
Appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C., against the Conviction and
Sentence dated 30-10-2017 in SC No. 203 of 2012 and SC.No. 223 of
2017 on the file of the Court of I Additional District and Sessions Judge
West Godavari at Eluru.
Between:
Kagithala Srinivas Rao @ Srinu @ Athiri @ Athiri Srinu, S/o.
Venkanna, Aged about; 28 years, Occ; Business, R/o. RR Pet,
Subbama Devi High School Road, Eluru, WG Dist, A.P.
...Appellant/Accused
AND
r
State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by Public Prosecutor (AP), High Court
atAmaravati.
...Respondent/Complainant
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Ramakrishna Akurathi
Counsel for the Respondent: Public Prosecutor
The Court made the following Common Order:
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY
AND
" HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA
CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos. 1478. 1481. 1562. 1667 & 1752 OF 2017
AND
755. 1071. 1072 & 2342 OF 2018
COMMON JUDGMENT:(per Hon'ble Sri Justice K.Suresh Reddy) Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence recorded by common judgment dated 30-10-2017 in Sessions Case Nos. 203 of 2012 and 223 of 2017 on the file of the Court of learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari District at Eluru (for short, 'the trial Court'), accused Nos. 1 and 5 therein filed Criminal Appeal No. 1562 of 2017, accused No. 3 therein filed Criminal Appeal No. 2342 of 2018, accused No. 4 therein filed Criminal Appeal No. 755 of 2018, accused No. 6 therein filed Criminal Appeal No. 1072 of 2018, accused Nos. 7 and 8 therein filed Criminal Appeal No. 1478 of 2017, accused No. 9 therein filed Criminal Appeal No. 1667 of 207, accused No. 11 therein filed Criminal Appeal No. 1752 of 2017, accused No. 12 therein filed Criminal Appeal No. 1481 of 2017 and accused No. 14 therein filed Criminal Appeal No. 1071 of 2018 before this Court. 2
2. Originally, accused Nos. 1 to 14 were charge sheeted in crime No. 58 of 2008 of Eluru II Town Law & Order Police Station. Initially, the ' case was numbered as Sessions Case No. 203 of 2012 against accused Nos. 1 to 14.
As accused No. 3 was absconding, a non bailable warrant was issued against him and the case against him was separated and renumbered as Sessions Case No. 223 of 2017. On 03-08-2017, accused No. 3 was produced before the trial Court on execution of the non-bailable warrant. Therefore, both the cases /.e. Sessions Case Nos. 203 of 2012 and 223 of 2017 were clubbed together and disposed of by common judgment which is impugned in the present appeals. During pendency of the trial accused Nos. 2, 10 and 13 died and therefore the case against them stood abated.
3. Since all these Criminal Appeals arise out of the same crime /.e. crime No. 58 of 2008 of Eluru II Town Law & Order Police Station, they are heard together and are being disposed of by way of this common judgment.
4. Accused Nos. 1, 3 to 12 and 14 were tried by the trial Court under the following charges:
I charge was under Section 120-B IPC against accused Nos. 1, 3 to 12 and 14;3
II charge was under Section 147 IPC against accused Nos. 1, 3 to 12 and 14;
III charge w'as under Section 148 IPC against accused Nos. 1, 3 to 12 and 14;
IV charge was under Section 302 IPC against accused Nos. 1, 3, 4 and 7; and V charge was under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC against accused Nos. 5, 6, 8 to 12 and 14.
5. Substance of the charges is that all the accused conspired together to do away with the life of one Chitti Satheesh (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') and in furtherance of their common intention, they hacked the deceased with knives on 11-03-2008 at about 1.30 p.m. at Karanamvari Street, Eluru, thereby committed offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 147, 148 and 302 read with Section 149 IPC.
6. After completion of trial, the trial Court convicted the appellants- accused Nos. 1, 3 to 9, 11, 12 and 14 and sentenced them to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence under Section 120-B IPC; ot suffer simple imprisonment for a period of two years for the offence under Section 147 IPC and to suffer simple 4 imprisonment for a period of three years for the offence under Section 148 IPC. The trial Court also convicted the appellants -accused Nos. 1 3, 4 and 7 and sentenced them to suffer ri rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, in default to suffer imprisonment for a period of three months, for the offence under Section 302 IPC. The trial Court further convicted the appellants
-accused Nos.
5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 14 and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/
- each, in default to suffer imprisonment for a period of three months, for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 149 ipq Case of the prosecution ini brief is thus;
All the
accused and the material
prosecution witnesses are
residents of Eluru Town. The deceased
was also resident of the same
town. P.W.1 i
IS mother, P.w.2 is friend, P.w.4 ISi cousin and P.W.9 i IS
brother of the deceased respectively. There! IS previous enrhity between the deceased and accused Nos.
1 and 3 since long time. On
13-01-2008 at about 9.30
pm., the deceased and his associates
attempted to kill
accused No. 1 at Tangellamudi Bridge, Eluru, causing severe Injuries to him. In that regard, a case In crime'No. 11 of 2008 was registered against the deceased and his associates for the offences .
under Sections 147, 148 and 307 read with Section 149 IPC. About 20 5 days prior tQ 11-03-2008, accused Nos. 1 to 3 conspired at Mamayyagari Sapota Garden, Tangellamudi, to do away with the life of the deceased. While so, on 11-03-2008 at about 1 p.rn., the deceased attended Court in connection with crime No. 11 of 2008 and at about 1 p.m he left the Court for his house situated near Chepalacheruvu Centre on his Hero Honda Motorcycle bearing registration No. AP 16 U
37. When the deceased reached Alekhyamma Temple Ce'ntre, accused Nos. 3 to 5 and 7 came in an auto and dashed the motorcycle of the deceased from his behind, due to which the deceased fell down from his motorcycle, got up and started running towards Alekhyamma Temple Lane. Accused No. 2 hacked the deceased on his neck with a knife.
At that time, Even after receiving injury, the deceased started running. accused No. 3 came in opposite direction and dashed the deceased on his chest with his head. When the deceased fell down, accused No. 3 stabbed him on his left leg and accused No. 5 beat the deceased with a ' stick. On noticing the arrival of public and P.W.4 and one Kanchi Muralikrishna Chinnikrishna-L.W.5, all the accused boarded their auto-rickshaw and fled away from the scene of offence along with crime weapons. P.W.4 and L.W.5 shifted the injured to Government Headquarters Hospital, Eluru, in 108-ambulance. 6 At about 2.10 p.m., P.W.16-Head Constable, Police Outpost, Government Headquarters Hospital, Eluru, received Ex.P28-Hospita l Intimation from the hospital. Immediately, he went to casualty ward and recorded a statement from the injured which was marked as Ex.P29.
At about 2 p.m., P.W.17-the then Sub Inspector of Police, II Town Law & Order Police Station, Eluru, received telephonic information from public about the attack on the deceased. Immediately, he went to the scene of offence along with his staff. He found the deceased while being shifted into ambulance. He posted two police constables at the scene of offence. He inquired about the accused in the vicinity but he could not trace them. At about 2.45 p.m., he went'to Government Headquarters' Hospital, Eluru, and received Exs.P28 and P29 from ' P.W.16. Immediately, he went to police station and registered a case in crime No. 58 of 2008 under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC on the basis of EXS.P28 and P29. He issued copies of FIR to all the concerned. FIR was marked as Ex.P30. After registering the crime, he visited the hospital and recorded a statement from the injured and P.W.4.
Later, he visited the first scene of offence and prepared an observation report-Ex.P7 in the presence of mediators. He also prepared a rough sketch-Ex.P31 and got the scene photographed under EXS.P13 to Pi6. He seized M.0.5-one pair of sandals and M.0.6-Hero 1 He also seized Honda Splendor Motorcycle belonging to the deceased. M.Os.1 to 4 at the first scene of offence. Later, he went to the second scene of offence situated near the house of P.W.10. He prepared an He seized observation report-Ex.P8 at the second scene of offence. bloodstained earth and controlled earth-M.0.7 at the second scene of offence. He also prepared a rough sketch-Ex.P32 at the second scene of offence. He also got the second scene photographed under Exs.P17 * to P25. At the scene of offence, he secured the presence of P.Ws.7, 8, 10 and 11 and recorded their statements. While undergoing treatment, the deceased succumbed to injuries on the morning of 13-03-2008. He received Ex.P33-death intimation at about 8 a.m. on 13-03-2008. He altered the Section of law from 307 IPC to 302 IPC and issued altered copies of FIR. Ex.P34 is altered FIR. Further investigation was taken over by P.W.19-the then Inspector of Police, Eluru Town Circle.
P.W.19 verified the investigation conducted by P.W:i7 and found it on correct lines. He visited Pinnamaneni Siddartha Hospital, Gannavaram, and held inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of mediators. Inquest report was marked as Ex.P12. He sent the dead body for conducting post mortem examination.
P.W.18-the then Assistant Professor, Department of Forensic Medicine, Siddartha Medical College, Gannavaram, conducted autopsy t 8 over the dead body of the deceased on 14-03-2008 at about 12 noon.
He found as many as 18 injuries on the person of the deceased, He opined the cause of death was due to multiple injuries. ■ He accordingly issued Ex.P35-posfmorfem certificate.
On 19-03-2008 at about 10.30 a.m., P.W.19 went to ASRAM Hospital Centre along with mediators-P.W.12 and another. At about 11 a m., he took accused No. 1 and his followers into custody in the presence of mediators, The accused said to. have confessed about the commission of offence, On the confession made by the arrested accused, he recovered M.Os.8 to 15 from the bushes near M.C.A. College in the presence of mediators, He arrested the accused and remanded them to judicial custody. He noticed accused Nos. 1 and 2 sustained injuries at the time of the alleged attack. He sent accused Nos. 1 and 2 to Governme nt Headquarters Hospital Eluru, for medical examination.
P W.15-Civil Assistant Surgeon, Government Eluru General Hospital, examined accused Nos.
Exs.P26 and P27-wound 1 and 2 on 20-03-2008 and issued certificates of accused Nos. 1 and 2 respectively opining that the ini injuries received by accused Nos. 1 and 2 were simple in nature.
9
On 27-03-2008 at about 3 p.m., P.W.19 arrested the remaining t accused in the presence of P.W.12 and another at M.R.C. Godowns situated near Railway Station, Eluru. He sent the material objects to Andhra Pradesh Forensic Science Laboratory, Hyderabad, for chemical analysis. F.S.L. Report was marked as Ex.P37. After receipt of all the documents and after completion of investigation, he filed charge sheet.
8. In support of its case, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 20 and got marked Exs.P1 to P40 apart from exhibiting M.Os.1 to 17.
9. When the accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. they denied the incriminating material appearing against them and reported no oral evidence, however got marked Exs.DI to D3 on their behalf.
trial . 10. Accepting the evidence of prosecution witnesses, the Court convicted the appellants-accused Nos. 1, 3 to 9, 11, 12 and 14 as afore-stated.
11. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent- State.
10
12. Learned counsel for the appellants-accused Nos. 1, 3 to 9 11, 12 and 14 would strenuously contend that though dying declaration was recorded by learned Special Judicial I Class Magistrate, Eluru-L.W.27 and there was a reference about the same in the charge sheet, the prosecution withheld the said dying declaration for the reasons best known to it; that P.W.17 in his evidence specifically stated that he also recorded dying declaration from the deceased but the same did not see the light of the day; that the deceased referred to the names of accused Nos. 1 to 6 and one Parasuram and Nageswara Rao in Ex.P29-dying declaration but P.W.19-lnvestigating Officer deleted the names of Parasuram and Nageswara Rao from the charge sheet stating that his investigation did not reveal their participation in the commission of offence and that no reliance can be placed on the dying declaration recorded by P.W.16, which was marked as Ex.P29, since the deceased implicated one Parasuram and Nageswara Rao falsely. Learned counsel would further contend that the evidence of P.Ws.2 to 4 is not consistent with each other; that though P.Ws.3 and 4 claimed to be eyewitnesses, P.W.2 did not refer to their presence at the time of incident and as such, P.Ws.3 11 and 4 are not eyewitnesses to' the incident and that the only evidence available on record is the evidence of P.W.2 which also does not inspire confidence of this Court. It is therefore prayed by learned counsel appearing for the appellants-accused Nos. 1, 3 to the 9, 11, 12 and 14 that the conviction and sentence recorded by trial Court is not sustainable and the same is liable to be set aside.
13. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on the other hand vehemently opposed contending that Ex.P29-dying declaration can be relied upon and the same cannot be brushed aside merely because the deceased implicated two persons falsely, that the evidence of P.Ws.2 to 4 disclosed the participation of accused Nos. 1 to 6 which was corroborated by Ex.P29 and that the prosecution is also relying on the evidence of P.W.12 who is a He therefore mediator for arrest and seizure of M.Os.8 to 15. requests this Court to dismiss the appeals by confirming the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court.
14. We have carefully scrutinized the entire evidence on record, In the case on hand the criminal law was set into motion on the basis of dying declaration-Ex.P29 recorded by P.W.16. In Ex.P29, 12 the deceased stated that accused Nos. 1 to 6 along with one Parasuram and Nageswara Rao came in an auto and dashed his motorcycle from behind and thereafter, they hacked on his head and other parts of the body, due to which he fell down from the vehicle and that immediately, P.W.4, L.W.5 and local people gathered there and P.W.4 and L.W.5 shifted him to Government Headquarters Hospital, Eluru. Except stating that, no specific overt acts have been attributed to any of the accused. Further, in Ex.P29, the deceased did not refer to the names of the other accused i.e. accused Nos. 7 to 14. Even P.Ws.2 to 4 also did not refer to the names of accused Nos. 7 to 14. As seen from the charge sheet averments, L.W.27 recorded dying declaration but the said dying declaration did not see the light of the day. Further, P.W.17, who initially investigated into the case, in his evidence specifically stated that on the same day, he visited the hospital and recorded statements from the deceased and P.W.4 in part-11 case diary. P.W.17 in his cross-examination admitted that he did not send the dying declaration to the Court and he handed over the same to P.W.19. The said dying declaration also did not see the 13 light of the day. P.W.19-lnvestigating Officer in his examination in chief categorically stated as follows:
"Since the participation of Barla Parasuram and Nageswara Rao \ in the incident is not proved in my investigation, I deleted them from the array of accused."
As already pointed out, though three dying declarations are available, among which one dying declaration was recorded by learned Special Judicial I Class Magistrate, Eluru-L.W.27, the dying declaration recorded by P.W.16 alone is placed on record. Even in Ex.P29-dying declaration, the deceased falsely implicated one Barla Parasuram and Nageswara Rao which was admitted by P.W.19-lnvestigating Officer. As such, the so called dying declaration-Ex.P29 does not inspire confidence of this Court to place any reliance on it.
15. Coming to the next aspect i.e. the evidence of P.W.2, he categorically stated in his examination in chief as under:
'On 11-03-2008 while I was going by walk from my house to Chepalacheruvu Centre through Bommada Tumu. By the time I reached Alekyamma Gudi Centre, I found the deceased going on 14 motorcycle from my behind and overtook me. After Satish overtook me, one auto came and hit the deceased. In the said auto, Pydi Raju (A-5), Durga Rao (A-4), Stalin (A-7), Athili Srinu (A-3) were sitting. The deceased fell down from his motorcycle soon after he was hit by the auto. Satish gotujp and started running towards Alekyamma Gudi Lane. Ganga (A-2) hacked the , deceased on his neck with a knife. Even after the deceased was hacked, he started running. At that time, A-3 came in the opposite direction and dashed the deceased on his chest with his head. On that Satish fell down. Then A-1 to A-5 came there, A-3 stabbed the deceased on his left leg and beat the deceased with stick, A-5 beat the deceased with stick. Then I telephoned to the Chinni Krishna (L.W.5) and informed him about the incident. Chinni Krishna and others came and shifted the deceased in Jeep to the Government Headguarters Hospital, Eluru. The deceased > later died at Gannavaram Hospital.
P.W.2 in his evidence attributed specific overt acts to accused Nos. 2, 3 and 5 alone. P.W.2 specifically admitted that he did not see accused No. 1 at the scene of offence. So far as the evidence of P.Ws.3 and 4 is concerned, P.W.2 in his evidence specifically stated that after witnessing the incident, he telephoned to L.W.5 15 of offence and shifted the who arrived immediately to the scene injured to Government Headquarters Hospital, Eluru. As such, the of offence and they presence of P.Ws.3 and 4 at the scene witnessing the incident is not established by the prosecution, Further, there are number of contradictions in the evidence of on the P.Ws.2 to 4.. Though as many as 18 injuries were found overt body of the deceased, P.W.2 attributed only three specific Officer-
acts to accused Nos. 2, 3 and 5. When the Investigating P.W.19 was confronted with the statement of P.W.2 recorded he stated as under;
during the course of investigation "P.W.2 omitted to state before me that accused No. 3 came and hit the deceased on his chest with head. P.W.2 omitted to state before me that A-3 hacked on the left leg of the deceased. P. W. 2 stated before me as in Ex. D1."
In view of the evidence of P.W.19 the evidence of P.W.2 is liable the incident. It has also to be discredited as he did not witness come on record that during pendency of the trial, accused No. 2 the accused in the said was murdered and P.Ws.3 and 4 are murder case. In view of the arch rivalry and longstanding enmity between the prosecution party and the accused, there is every 16 likelihood of false implication. As already pointed out, nobody referred to the names and participation of accused Nos. 7 to 14 including the deceased. Further, the prosecution could not able to place any material to show the so called conspiracy. So far as the evidence of P.W. 1, mother of the deceased, is concerned, she is not an eyewitness even according to the case of prosecution.
16. Having perused the entire evidence on -record, the oral evidence adduced by P.Ws.2 to 4 and the dying declaration of the deceased-Ex.P29 do not inspire confidence of this Court and as such, the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court is not sustainable.
17. In the result, the criminal appeals are allowed setting aside the conviction and sentence recorded against the appellants- accused No$. 1, 3 to 9, 11, 12 and 14 by common judgment dated 30-10-2017 in Sessions Case Nos. 203 of 2012 -and 223 of 2017 on the file of the Court of learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari District at Eluru. The appellants-accused Nos. 1, 3 to 9, 11, 12 and 14 are acquitted of all the charges. As the appellants-accused Nos. 1, 3 to 9, 11, 12 and 14 have been 17 released on bail by this Court, in terms of the order passed by a Division Bench of the Composite High Court for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh in Batchu Ranga Rao and others Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Public Prosecutor (CrI.A.M.P.No. 1687 of 2016 in CrI.A.No. ' 607 of 2011 dated 02-11-2016), they are directed to surrender themselves before the concerned jail authorities for completing the formalities for their release. Fine amount paid, if any, by the appellants-accused Nos. 1, 3 to 9, 11, 12 and 14 shall be refunded to them. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand disposed of in consequence.
Sd/- E KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,
1. The I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Eluru, West Godavari District, (with records)
2. The II Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class; Eluru, West Godavari District, (with records)
3. The Superintendent, Rajahmundry Central Prison, East Godavari District.
4. The Station House Officer, Eluru II Town L & O Police Station, West Godavari District.
5. One CC to Sri B V Krishna Reddy Advocate [OPUC]
6. One CC to Sri T Nagarjuna Reddy Advocate [OPUC]
7. One CC to Sri G L Nageswar Rao Advocate [OPUC]
8. One CC to Dr Challa Srinivasa Reddy Advocate [OPUC]
9. One CC to Sri M.Thirumal Rao Advocate [OPUC]
10. One CC to Sri G Vijaya Saradhi Advocate [OPUC] 11 .One CC to Smt. Nitta Swarnalatha Advocate [OPUC]
12. One CC to Sri M K Raj Kumar Advocate [OPUC]
13. One CC to Sri Ramakrishna Akurathi Advocate [OPUC]
14. Two CC's to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati [OUT]
15. The Section Officer, Criminal Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati.
16.Two CD Copies SAM vna HIGH COURT DATED:08/07/2025 COMMON JUDGMENT CRLA Nos: 1478,1481,1562,1667 and 1752 of 2017 and 755,1071, 1072 & 2342 of 2018 ALLOWING THESE CRIMINAL APPEALS