Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Nallamilli China [email protected] vs State Of A.P. on 20 May, 2014
Î@ 1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1129 OF 2010
NALLAMILLI CHINA VENKATESU @ ... APPELLANTS
VENKATESWARA RAO & ORS.
VERSUS
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH ... RESPONDENT
ORDER
The appellants, who are related to each other, faced trial in Sessions Case No. 68 of 2003 before the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Eluru on the charges of committing offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 324 read with Section 149, IPC. The main allegation against them was that by forming unlawful assembly they led a fight and committed murder of two persons with sticks and deadly weapons and voluntarily caused hurt to some villagers.
2. According to the prosecution story, there was rivalry erupted between the families of the appellants and the deceased ever since the appellant No. 1 defeated the son of deceased No. 1 as Ward Member in the panchayat elections. On the fateful day, Appellant No. 1 started an altercation with deceased No. 1, namely, Kakurala Rama 2 Rao, questioning the latter’s propriety in settling a village dispute (ghalata) which led to the killing of both the deceased persons at the hands of the appellants.
3. Upon the complaint made by the son of deceased No.1, police registered the case, conducted inquest, seized material objects and arrested the accused. The Additional Sessions Judge, Eluru framed charges. The prosecution examined 15 witnesses and exhibited 8 material objects, to prove its case. The trial Court, after evaluation of entire evidence, came to the conclusion that the accused--appellants were guilty for the offences charged against them and accordingly convicted and sentenced them as under:
A-1 to A-8 each of the accused is convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.200/-; in default S.I. for a period of one month each, for the offence under Section 148, IPC.
A-1 to A-8 each of the accused is convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-; in default S.I. for a period of one year each, separately, for the offence under Section 302, IPC for committing murder of Kakurla Rama Rao and Kakurla Pilla Venkanna @ Venkanna.3
A-6 and A-8 are convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years each and to pay fine of Rs.500/- each, in default, S.I. for one month each for the offence under Section 324, IPC.
A-2 and A-3 are convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years each and to pay fine of Rs.500/- each, in default, S.I. for one month each for the offence under Section 324, IPC.
A-1 and A-4 to A-8 are convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years each, and to pay fine of Rs.500/- each, in default S.I. for one month each, for another offence under Section 324, IPC.
All the sentences were, however, ordered to run concurrently.
4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid conviction and sentence, the accused preferred criminal appeal before the High Court. The Division Bench of the High Court, after reappreciation of entire evidence, dismissed the appeal affirming the judgment of the Trial Court in all respects.
5. Before us, learned counsel for the appellants argued that there were inconsistencies in the version of the witnesses and the Courts 4 below have ignored these inconsistencies and misinterpreted the facts and therefore the impugned judgment requires to be set aside.
6. We have carefully gone through the judgments of the Trial court as well as the High Court and also perused the material available on record. In our considered view, the Courts below have dealt with the matter in its entirety in the right perspective and left no scope for this Court to interfere.
7. Admittedly, the altercation led to a war like situation in which the appellants participated with deadly weapons. PWs 1 and 2 were eyewitnesses to the attack on deceased No. 1 whereas PWs 4 and 5 witnessed the attack on deceased No. 2. PW-2, the daughter of deceased No. 1, clearly stated that when her father went to settle a petty dispute in the village, Appellant No. 1 came there and in a harsh voice questioned his propriety to settle the dispute, when he being the elected panchayat member. Subsequently, the appellant No. 1 beat the deceased No. 1 on his head with a stick which made him to fell down. Immediately, other accused attacked the victim with deadly weapons and murdered him. The version of PW-2 has also been corroborated with the statement of PW-3.
5
8. Likewise, PW-4, the sister-in-law of the deceased Nos. 1 and 2, stated in her deposition that the deceased No. 2 came to her house in the mid night to hide with the fear of becoming prey to the accused. Soon thereafter, the accused armed with sticks and deadly weapons entered into her house, pushed her aside and caused murder of deceased No. 2 by beating him mercilessly with the weapons.
9. PW-9, the doctor who conducted postmortem examination on deceased No. 1 found as many as five external injuries on the body of deceased No. 1 and opined that the cause of death was shock due to head injury i.e. the cut injury of 4" x 2" x 1" right side of forehead bone deep with 5" long fracture on the right side of skull. Blood cots were also present including a clot of 100 ml on the right side of brain.
10. Whereas PW-10, the Assistant Civil Surgeon who conducted postmortem examination on deceased No. 2, noticed as many as 22 injuries on the body of the deceased. In his opinion, the deceased might have died of shock and hemorrhage due to multiple injuries including injury to the great vessels of the neck.
11. Considering the evidence of the prosecution witnesses coupled with the medical evidence which is completely corroborative, the guilt of the accused has been established beyond any doubt. In our 6 opinion, therefore, the Courts below have rightly convicted and sentenced the accused for the offences charged against each of them according to the role played by each of them in the crime.
12. In view of the foregoing, the appeal lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.
................................................J. (DIPAK MISRA) .................................................J. (N.V. RAMANA) NEW DELHI, MAY 20, 2014.
ITEM NO.107 COURT NO.5 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1129 OF 2010
NALLAMILLI CHINA [email protected] & ORS. Appellant (s)
VERSUS
STATE OF A.P. Respondent(s)
Date: 20/05/2014 This Appeal was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA
(Vacation Bench)
For Appellant(s) Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr.A.T.M. Rangaramanujan, Sr.Adv.
Mr. D. Mahesh Babu,Adv.
Mr. Amit K. Nain, Adv.
Mr. T.V. Bhaskar Reddy, Adv.
Mr. Amjid Maqbool, Adv.
Ms. Suchitra Hrangkhawl, Adv.
Mr. Aditya Jain, Adv,
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The criminal appeal is dismissed in terms of the signed order.
(Usha Bhardwaj) [Renuka Sadana]
A.R.-cum-P.S. Court Master
Signed order is placed on the file.