B BHADRIAH Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under S. 2(A) of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act read with S. 379, Cr. P.C. The five appellants (original accused Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5) were tried along with four others for offences punishable under Ss. 148, 302 149, 324 and 323 read with S.149, I.P.C. for the alleged murder of one Vinod Sagar, the deceased in the case and for causing injuries to P.Ws. 1 and 4 during the same occurrence. The trial Court acquitted all of them. The State preferred an appeal and the High Court allowed the same in respect of these appellants and convicted and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life and other lesser terms of imprisonment for other offences and confirmed the acquittal of the remaining four accused. The prosecution case is as follows:

(2.) The learned Session Judge examined the case with reference to A-1 to A-5 and A-6 to A-9 separately. A-6 to A-9 were acquitted mainly on the ground that their names were not mentioned in Ex.P. 1 or in the statements recorded during the inquest. So far as A-1 to A-5 were concerned, the learned Sessions Judge referred to certain corrections in Ex.P.3, the wound certificate regarding injuries on P.W.1 issued by P.W. 6 and also doubted the possibility of P.W.1 having given Ex.P.1. He disbelieved the evidence of the eye-witnesses as against A-1 to A-5 mainly on the ground that the names of these accused were not mentioned to the Doctor before whom the deceased was brought and that in Ex.P.3 the word "unknown" in the sentence "alleged to have been beaten with sticks and knives by unknown people at 11.15 p.m." was corrected to "known." The learned Sessions Judge also observed that earlier statements recorded under S.161, Cr. P.C. were suppressed. He also pointed certain improvements in the testimonies of P.Ws. 1 to 4 and ultimately gave the benefit of doubt to A-1 to A-5 also. The High Court after a detailed discussion on the evidence of the eye-witnesses observed that the so-called improvements pointed out by the learned Sessions Judge are not at all material and they do not affect the veracity of these witnesses. Regarding the correction of the word "unknown" to "known" in Ex. P.3 the High Court pointed out that it is not at all significant and on that basis the evidence of P.Ws. 1 to 4 particularly the evidence of the injured witness cannot be discarded. The High Court also observed that Ex. P.I. was promptly given and it contains the names of the five appellants. Ultimately the High Court held that the prosecution has established its case against these five appellants.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted before us that the view taken by the trial Court is not at all unreasonable and the infirmities pointed out by the learned Sessions Judge are of vital importance and that the High Court erred in coming to a different conclusion .