PITCHAPATI RAMANA REDDY Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by A1 aggrieved by the judgment dated 28.04.2011 in S.C.No.19 of 2002 passed by the III Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Nellore whereby the learned Judge convicted A1 for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to suffer RI for life and to pay fine of Rs.100/- in default to suffer SI for one month, while acquitting A2.

(2.) The prosecution case is thus:

(3.) A perusal of the judgment of the Court below would show that trial Court considered PWs.1 to 3 as eye-witnesses, of which PW2 was the direct eye-witness and held that their evidence clearly established the presence of accused at the scene of offence and further, A1 hacking the deceased with axe. Due to the strong and cogent evidence of eyewitnesses, the trial Court did not give much importance to the motive which the prosecution could not establish convincingly. The defence plea was one of total denial and further, they attributed the death to two sons-in-law of the deceased on the allegation that they demanded shares in the property of the deceased to their wives which he refused and so, in the altercation they caused him injury and death at some other place and brought him to the cattle shed and laid on the cot and the family members of the deceased, in order to save the sons-in-law, foisted a false case against the accused. The trial Court did not believe the defence plea. The trial Court ultimately held that prosecution could establish the guilt against A1 alone but however, A2 is concerned, the trial Court held, though the presence of A2 was spoken by eye-witnesses, his participation in the offence was not established and further, the alleged recovery of MO1-axe from A2 was also not established. Accordingly, the trial Court while acquitting A2 convicted and sentenced A1 as stated supra.