NANDIGAMA VEERAIAH Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the conviction and sentence under Section 302 of IPC. Two accused were tried in Sessions Case No.525 of 1996 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Nalgonda. A1 and A2 were charged with an offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 and A2 was also charged with an offence under Section 324 of IPC. A2 was acquitted, whereas A1 was convicted of the offence under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.100/-, in default he has to undergo simple imprisonment for one week.

(2.) The allegations against the accused were that on a or about 16-1-1996 at about 7-00 p.m., at Boorugadda village A1 committed the murder of Kastala Gopaiah by beating him with an axe on his head, when A2 caught hold of him. There was an additional charge against A2 that he voluntarily caused hurt to Kustala Venkateshwarlu. When the charges were framed, the accused pleaded not guilty and they were tried. The prosecution examined 11 witnesses and exhibited 17 documents.

(3.) PW1 is the son of the deceased. He knew A2. He stated that while he was returning home after doing his job of restoring streetlights, as he has been employed by Sarpanch, when he found A1 and A2 quarrelling with each other. Bollepally Kanakamma and her son-in-law were also there watching the quarrel between the accused. When Bollepally Kanakamma intervened, they asked her to leave the place. A2 abused Bollepally Kankamma and pushed her. Kasiala Pedda Lachaiuh also questioned him as to why he was pushing the lady, while abusing him in filthy language. The A2 gave a slap to Kastala Pedda Lachaiah. At that time his father was sweeping front yard of his house. On seeing A2 giving the slap to Kastala Pedda Lachaiah, he intervened. Then A2 pushed the witness's father who fell down. Me got up and started questioning A2. A2"s brother A1 picked up an axe and axed his father on his head. A2 tried to beat his father with a stick. When he intervened, the below fell on his head. Both the accused went away. The incident took place at about 7-00 p.m. The witness's mother Kastala Venkamma, Kastala Veeriah and Nandigama Nagaraju were also present at the time of incident. The deceased fell down and became unconscious. He was removed in an auto to Huzurnagar Hospital. He kept the body in the hospital premises and when to the Police Station. He handed over a complaint Ex.P1 to police. He got it written by an educated person who was available near the Police Station. He also received an injury. He was admitted to the hospital for treatment. Police examined him. His father sustained bleeding injury and he was removed to Osmania General Hospital, Hyderabad from Huzurnagar Hospital. On the way to Hyderabad his father died. He also identified MO 1 blue colour polyester full shirt and MO 2 white dothi as belonging to the deceased. He also identified the axe MO3 with which the deceased was axed by Al, and the stick MO4 by which A2 beat him on his head. His examination-in-chief was held on 6-10-1998. His cross-examination was deferred by the learned Sessions Judge at request till the examination of other eye-witnesses and eventually the cross-examination was made on 17-11-1998. In the cross-examination he stated that the accused were his nephews being his sister's children. He and the accused belong to the same village. He did not know the reasons as to why the accused were quarrelling with each other. At the time of occurrence it was dark and he was putting on the streetlights. By the time he came to the scene of occurrence, the accused were quarrelling. He went inside his house. He came out 15 minutes later. When he came out, he found his father lying on the ground. 20 people were present when the altercation took place. The accused and the people who gathered were under the influence of drinks. He removed his father who was lying on the ground in an auto and took him to the hospital. His father had received injury on his head. The doctors at Huzurnagar Hospital refused to treat the deceased unless a case was booked, therefore, he went to the Police Station and got a report written by a Muslim. He got the names of the accused persons incorporated in Ex.Pl as they were fighting and quarreling. He suspected them for the injury. When he removed his father in the auto, he also came into contact with the auto and received injury on his head. At that time his father was not in a position to talk. He did not know whether his father was drunk at the time of occurrence. His father used to drink. He did not witness the occurrence and because of suspicion he had given report Ex.Pl to police. As it was dark, he was not able to know as to what was happening. After this cross-examination, the witness was declared Hostile. He was allowed to be cross-examined by the Public Prosecutor. He stated that whatever he deposed in the examination-in-chief was at the instance of police and in cross- examination he had spoken the truth. He had brought a lantern to see his father was lying on the ground. The accused were present along with 20 persons there. When the had seen the accused quarrelling, his father was alive and standing. The accused were quarrelling with each other at a distance of 20 yards from his house. He had got Ex.P1 written on his own and the police was not present. The police had not used any force to make him write Ex.Pl. He had identified the accused in the Court, but he had not seen using of axe by anybody. He had told the doctor that he had sustained injury by coming into contact with an auto which he had not told the police. He denied having made a statement implicating the accused under Section 161 of Cr.PC. There were electric lights at a distance of 20 yards from the scene of offence.