LAWS(APH)-2018-8-42

MUTYALA MADHUSUDANA RAO Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

Decided On August 08, 2018
Mutyala Madhusudana Rao Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is A4 among six accused in Crime No.23 of 2018 on the file of the Station House Officer, Orvakal Police Station, Kurnool Disttict. Originally on 25.01.2018 the crime was registered as if the accidental death of K.Srinivasulu (deceased) for the offence punishable under Section 304-A IPC from the written complaint of Pasupula Ramana-A6 as the de facto complainant.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State of Andhra Pradesh and perused the material on record.

(3.) During the course of investigation revealed it is a pre-plan brutal murder of the deceased and a false report given by the accused persons using A6 as if it is the accidental death to screen the evidence and escape from the clutches of law. Undisputedly, A1 by name Arveti Ramesh is no other than the brother-in-law of deceased, A3 is wife of A1, and A2 is no other than the wife of deceased and sister of A1. As per the prosecution case, from the said investigation revealed as A4, who is the present petitioner for anticipatory bail by name Mutyala Madhusudana Rao @ Madhu having elopement with A2 even during life time of deceased Srinivasulu. The investigation revealed from the privy and pre-concert to the nefarious plan crime among the accused to eliminate the deceased with different motives to continue the illicit relationship between A2 and A4 on one aspect, several insurance policies taken in the name of the deceased to gain benefit therefrom particularly by A1 to A4 on another aspect, and to show as an accidental death to further claim as an insurance of the road accidental claim and with that privy they hired A5 and A6 to murder the deceased and create as if the accidental death; and it is part of that from the investigation revealed about they pushed the deceased on seeing the Eicher vehicle coming, from which the vehicle knocked him and died instantaneously and as per the preplan, A6 given the report as if he is the eye-witness of the accidental death by conciliation of their murder as per the pre-plan.