(1.) The appellants/Accused Nos. 1 to 3 (1. Shaik Mohiddin, 2. Shaik Badulla, 3. Pappula Madhu) in Sessions Case No.137 of 2012 on the file of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, SPSR Nellore, preferred this criminal appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C, challenging the conviction and sentence passed in calendar and judgment dated 29.10.2014, whereunder the Trial Court found Accused Nos.1 and 2 guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C, sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.100/- each in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months each. Accused No.1 is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten (10) years and to pay fine of Rs.100/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 307 I.P.C. Further, Accused No.3 is further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.100/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 114 r./w 302 I.P.C. Accused No.3 is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten (10) years and to pay fine of Rs.100/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 114 r/w 307 I.P.C.
(2.) The parties hereinafter will be referred as accused and prosecution, to avoid inconvenience in reference.
(3.) The case of prosecution in nut-shell is that, on 17.04.2010 morning, a party approached Accused No.3 for measuring their plot in Saibaba Nagar and thereafter at 9:30 A.M, Accused No.3 took the deceased to show the said plot. The party paid Rs.200/- for their services. Accused No.3 refused to pay Rs.100/- to the deceased towards his share and there was quarrel between Accused No.3 and Malisetty Kondaiah (deceased). In that connection, at about 1 P.M, on the same day, Accused Nos. 1 and 3 went to the deceased while he was proceeding to his house, beat him. One G. Samson and other villagers intervened and separated them.