KAKATLA KEHSAVA REDDY Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the conviction for the offence under Section 395 of IPC and the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs.500/-, A.5 in Crime No.68 of 2004 of Ghanpur Police Station of Warangal District, the sole accused in S.C. No.546 of 2006 on the file of Court of II Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Warangal preferred this appeal.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that the appellant along with others committed dacoity in the house of P.W.1 during the intervening night of 27/28-8-2004. In support of its case, the prosecution examined eight witnesses and marked Ex.P.1 to P.8 and M.Os.1 to 4.

(3.) The case of the prosecution, as revealed from the evidence adduced, is P.W.2 is the wife of P.W.1. P.W.3 is the friend of P.W.1. During the intervening night of 27/28-8-2004, when P.W.1 and P.W.2 with their children were sleeping in their house, four people armed with sticks entered into their house by breaking open the doors, woke them up after surrounding P.Ws. 1 and 2 and threatened them to handover the cash and valuables available with them and when P.Ws.1 and 2 stated that they do not have any cash or valuables with them, those persons opened the almirah, and took away one gold chain weighing about 11/2 tulas, another gold chain weighing about 1/2 tula therefrom and snatched the pusthelathadu, gold ring and ear studs belonging to P.W.2 and took away their TV while leaving the house of PWs.1 and 2. So P.W.1 gave Ex.P1 report to P.W.7 who registered it as Crime No.68 of 2004 under Section 392 IPC, issued Ex.P8 - FIR and informed P.W.8 about the offence, P.W.8 took up investigation, proceeded to the scene of offence, prepared Ex.P4 panchanama of the scene of offence, in the presence of P.W.5 and arrested the appellant on 3-12-2004 at about 3.00 p.m. at Gandhinagar X road near bus stop on suspicion and interrogated him in the presence of P.W.4 and another, and recovered M.Os.2 to 4 from him and M.O.I from his house under Exs.P2 and P3 - confession and recovery panchanamas, and sent him to judicial remand. After receipt of a requisition for holding a Test Identification Parade, P.W.6 conducted Test Identification Parade under Ex.P.7 proceedings. After completion of investigation, P.W.8 filed the charge-sheet. As stated earlier, the trial Court believed the case of the prosecution and convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned above.