GINNI APPA RAO Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Appeal No. 1624 of 1998 is filed by A-1, who had faced the trial in Sessions Case No. 44 of 1995 before the First Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam. Criminal Appeal No. 1376 of 1998 is filed by A-2. He was also an Accused No. 2 in Sessions Case No. 44 of 1995, which was decided by the First Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam. Since both the appeals arise out of a common judgment in Sessions Case No. 44 of 1995, they are disposed of by a common judgment.

(2.) Originally A-1 and A-2 along with A-3 were tried in Sessions Case No. 44 of 1995. But A-3 was absconded and therefore his case was separated and numbered as Sessions Case No. 55 of 1997. Only A-1 and A-2 faced the charges punishable under Sections 449, 382, 394, 404 and 120 (B) read with Section 34, IPC. The first charge against A-1 and A-2 was under Section 449 read with 34, IPC for trespassing into the building of one Kommuru Annapurnamma (hereinafter referred to as 'Deceased)". The second charge against A-l and A-2 was under Section 302 read with Section 34, IPC for causing the death of the deceased with common intention. The 3rd charge against A-1 and A-2 was under Section 382 read with Section 34, IPC for committing theft of gold jewellery of the deceased after making preparation for causing the death by throttling. The 4th charge against A-1 and A-2 was under Section 394 read with Section 34, IPC for causing hurt to the deceased while committing robbery. The 5th charge against A-1 and A-2 was under Section 404 read with Section 34, IPC for dishonestly misappropriating certain property belonging to the deceased. The 6th charge against A-1 and A-2 was under Section 120 (B) IPC to kill and to rob the jewellery of the deceased and also to misappropriate the same dishonestly. An additional charge framed against A-1 and -2 was under Section 412, IPC for dishonestly retaining the stolen property of the deceased . knowing that the same has been transferred by commission on dacoity.

(3.) On evidence the learned Judge found A-1 guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 412, IPC. A-l was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302, IPC and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. He was further convicted for the offence punishable under Section 412, IPC and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for four (4) years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. Both the substantive sentences were made to run concurrently. On evidence the learned judge found A-2 guilty for the offence punishable under Section 412, IPC. He was convicted and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for four (4) years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to suffer imprisonment for three months. Both the accused were found not guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 419, 382, 394, 404 and 120 (B), IPC and therefore they were acquitted of the aforesaid offences. Further A-2 was not found guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302, IPC.