(1.) THE appellant/2nd accused (A-2) questions judgment dated 05.09.2005 of the II Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur in Sessions Case No.791 of 2001 by which he was convicted under Section 120B(1) IPC and was sentenced to life imprisonment and fine of Rs.500/-; and was convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment and fine of Rs.500/-. A-1 who was facing charge for offence punishable under Section 120(B)(1) IPC died when the matter was pending in the lower court.
(2.) A-1, A-2 and the deceased Alapati Nageswara Rao were workers in Sangam Dairy, Vadlamudi. Due to differences between A-1 and the deceased in chit fund transactions, it is alleged that A-1 and A-2 conspired and A-1 instigated A-2 who attacked the deceased with M.O.4 knife near transformer of Sangam Diary quarters at Vadlamudi and that after inflicting injuries, A-2 left his chapels M.O-2 there, went towards A-1 and both of them ran away.
(3.) IN Ex.P-4 post-mortem certificate, he opined that the deceased would appear to have died of shock and haemorrhage due to multiple injuries about 24 hours prior to autopsy. IN cross examination, P.W7 deposed that all the injuries are not elliptical in shape and that elliptical injuries can be caused by double edged cutting weapon and that single edged weapon causes wedge shaped injuries and that as there are elliptical and non-elliptical injuries, the deceased in all probability might have been attacked with two different kinds of weapons. He says that he did not describe shape of injury No. 1 and that if injury No.1 is also elliptical in shape, he would have mentioned the same in his certificate.