MULLAGIRI VAJRAM Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Twelve persons were challenged for the murder of Nethala Veeraswarny, a resident and Sarpanch of village Ramaraogudem in Eluru Taluq, West Godavari District (A.P.) in the night of 31-12-1977. Learned Sessions Judge, West Godavari Division, Eluru, tried the case and relying on the evidence of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 7 in toto and the evidence of P.W. 3 to some extent convicted all the accused persons for the offences charged under Section 302 read with Section 149, I.P.C. and awarded each one of them sentence of imprisonment for life and other minor terms of imprisonment for other offences. On appeal the High Court set aside the conviction and sentence of seven accused persons, namely, Dasari Bhaskara Rao (A-4), Kali China Krishna (A-5), Namburi Lakshmana (A-8), Namburi Ramulu (A-9), Namburi Prasada Rao (A-10), Mada Govardhana Rao (A-11) and Kali Kamaka Rao (A-12). The High Court confirmed the conviction of the remaining five accused persons Mullagiri Vajram (A-1), Mullagiri Yasupadam (A-2), Dasari Bhima Rao (A-3), Mada Lakshmandas (A-6) and Gadi Abraham (A-7) under Section 302 read with Section 149, I.P.C. and sentenced them to imprisonment for fife. The High Court further held that as these accused had been sentenced for the main offence under Section 302 read with Section 149, I.P.C. and there was no need of separate sentence under Sections 148 and 147, I.P.C.

(2.) The five accused A-1, A-2, A-3, A-6 and A-7 have come before this Court in appeal against the order of the High Court by grant of Special leave. Mada Lakshma (A-6) expired during the pendency of appeal before this Court as such the appeal filed by him was dismissed as having abated by order, dated 8-4-1992. We are now concerned in this appeal with the four accused appellants A-1, A-2, A-3 and A-7.

(3.) We have gone through the Judgment of the lower Courts and have perused the record and have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties. The High Court has considered the prosecution evidence in detail and has placed reliance on the statements of P.Ws. 1, 2, 3 and 4 as eyewitnesses of the incident. The High Court has placed implicit reliance on the testimony of P.W. 2 and who was a clerk working in the panchayat office of Ramaraogudem and had accompanied the deceased in an autorichshaw and had seen the incident. We find no infirmity in the statement of P.W. 2 and the High Court has rightly placed reliance on his evidence.