ISUKAPALLI SURYA RAO Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri T.S.N. Murthy, the Counsel representing the appellant/ accused provided by way of legal aid and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

(2.) Isukapatti Surya Rao, accused in S.C. No. 131 of 1999 on the file of the Sessions Judge, East Godavari, Rajahmundry aggrieved by the judgment dated 4-12-2000 convicting and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years for an offence under Section 304 Part-II IPC, had preferred the present appeal.

(3.) Sri T.S.N. Murthy, learned Counsel representing the appellant/accused would submit that except the evidence of PW.l, mere is no other evidence available on record and P.W.I is none other than the wife of the appellant/accused and in view of certain misunderstandings between the husband and wife, the wife unnecessarily had implicated the husband in the present false case. The learned Counsel also further elaborately argued relating to the findings recorded by the learned Judge on the aspect of recovery of M.O.I stick and would contend that the learned Judge having observed that he was not inclined to accept the version of the prosecution that M.O.I was recovered in pursuance of the disclosure statement of the accused, definitely erred in convicting the accused on the sole uncorroborated testimony of P.W.I, especially, in the light of the enmity or misunderstandings between the wife and husband.