JUVVANDAPUDI DATTU Vs. STATE OF AP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The simple question that arises in this revision is, what are the prime distinguishing factors for constitution of an offence under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) This revision is directed against confirmation of the conviction under see. 307 IPC by the lower appellate Court while reducing the substantial sentence of imprisonment to one year from five years and confirming the fine amount of Rs. 1000/- imposed by the trial Court.

(3.) The brief facts relevant for disposal of this revision as spoken to by the material prosecution witnesses are: On 17-5-88 at about 8-00 pm. when PW1 was sitting in front of the house of PW2 (Mannem Venkateswara Rao) the accused petitioner came there with an intention to kill PW1 and hacked him with a knife on the right side of abdomen and also on the right fore-arm. When PWI raised cries, people came there and witnessed the attack. On seeing the witnesses, the accused ran away. PW1 was examined by the Doctor, PW7, who issued a wound certificate (Ex. P3) stating that the injuries suffered by PW1 were simple in nature. The injuries noted are: (i) incised wound on the right fore-arm of 5 cm. x 2 cm, and (ii) stab wound on the epigastric region on the right side of the size 5 cm. x 2 cm. The motive for the attack according to PW1 is that he pursued and worked hard in the rape case of one Mariamma in which the accused was involved. That incident of rape was on 18-9-87. The police after completion of investigation laid the charge-sheet. Both the Courts below on a consideration of the entire material on record convicted the petitioner under sec. 307 IPC and sentenced him as stated supra.