KALIDINDI PATIYYA Vs. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused No. 1 in Sessions Case No. 49 of 2015 on the file of the IX Additional Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Kovvur, is the appellant herein. Originally, Accused No. 1 and 2 in the above Sessions case were tried for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C., for causing the death of one Edupuganti Srinu ['deceased'], on 19.10.2013. By its judgment, dated 18.08.2015, the learned Sessions Judge, while acquitting Accused No. 2 convicted Accused No. 1, for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months. The remand undergone by the accused was directed to be given set off. Challenging the same, the present appeal came to be filed.

(2.) The facts, as culled out, from the evidence of prosecution witnesses are as under:

(3.) Sri D. Ramakrishna, learned counsel for the Appellant would contend that, the entire case is based on the alleged extra-judicial confessions said to have been made by A1 before PW1 - the Doctor, which cannot be relied upon. He would submit that, there is any amount of doubt as to whether this statement can be treated as extra-judicial confession. Relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pattipati Venkaiah v. State of A.P. (1985) 4 SCC 80 , AIR 1985 SC 1715 he would submit that, the act of PW1 in examining the informant and noting down the details of information is impermissible in law. He would further submit that, there exists number of omissions in the evidence of PW1 and that his evidence is inconsistent with the evidence of PW2 with regard to contents of extra-judicial confession. In other words, his plea is that, if really A1 was involved in the commission of offence, he would not have brought the injured to the hospital, or even if he has brought the injured to the hospital, he would have escaped leaving the body there.