SAKALI HANMANTH Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Questioning the validity and the legality of the judgment that is rendered by the Court of IV Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Nagarkunrool, dtd. 16/12/2016 in Sessions Case No.611 of 2013 which stood pending on the file of the said Court, the appellant, who is the accused in the said Sessions Case, approached this Court by way of appeal.

(2.) Basing on the charge that the appellant (hereinafter be referred as "the accused" for convenience) committed the offence punishable under Sec. 302 I.P.C., the trial Court convicted and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000.00, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. Aggrieved by the said verdict, the accused approached this Court questioning its validity and legality.

(3.) The grievance of the accused is that the trial Court totally ignored the fact that there were no eye-witnesses to the alleged incident and the trial Court wrongly based its judgment on circumstantial and hearsay evidence. He further pointed out that the trial Court relied upon the fact that the deceased was last seen in his company, but it failed to observe that there was no evidence that himself and the deceased left the arrack shop together after consuming liquor. The accused further pointed out that the trial Court got confused and wrongly expected him to disprove the contents of Ex.P-9-F.I.R. and further, it erred in believing the evidence of P.W-9, Ex.P-3-the alleged confessional statement and the recovery of M.O-1 and thus, the judgment of the trial Court is unsustainable.