G CHINNA BOJI Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants 1 and 2 herein were charged with the offence under Section 302 of the indian Penal Code (IPC) and the third appellant was charged for the offence under section 302 read with Section 114 IPC and all of them, in turn, were charged for committing the same offence with common intention i. e. , committing murder of one Joga kannaiah at 08. 00 p. m. , on 19. 2. 2000 at the bus stop of Ramavaram Village of Kothagudem District. In Sessions Case no. 5 of 2002, the Court of the V Additional district and Sessions Judge (FTC), khammam at Kothagudem convicted the appellants for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced them to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for three months. Hence, the appeal.

(2.) THE prosecution against the appellants was set at motion with the submission of a complaint in Ex. P. l by p. W. 1-wife of the deceased. She stated that she received information from P. W. 3 to the effect that he was informed by P. W. 4 that when Kannaiah was returning from the neighbouring village on a bicycle, the appellants herein attacked him with a knife and sticks and on receiving the first blow, Kannaiah left the bicycle and started running. It was alleged that he was chased by the appellants and at a distance of 100 yards from the place where he left the cycle, he was attacked with sticks and he fell down. P. W. 1 is said to have gone to the scene of offence and noticed that her husband died of the injuries. She referred to some family disputes, as the motive for the appellants to commit the murder of her husband.

(3.) P. W. L0-THE Sub-Inspector of police, Julurpad took up the investigation, conducted inquest and caused the postmortem through P. W. 11. The inquest report and the post-mortem certificate were marked as Exs. P. 2 and P. 7 respectively. Charges under the relevant provisions were framed. The appellants pleaded not guilty. The trial Court held that the appellants committed murder of the deceased and imposed the sentences, as indicated above.