BHAIRAPU CHINNA RAJAIAH BALARAJU Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal is filed against the Judgment dtd. 3/6/2015 in S.C.No.245 of 2015 passed by the learned IX Additional Sessions Judge, Kamareddy.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that appellant/accused alleged to have killed one Yadamma (herein after referred to as deceased) and thus accused committed offence punishable under Sec. 302 of I.P.C. To prove the guilt of accused, prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 12 and got marked Exs.P1 to P10. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of defense. The Trial Court after considering the arguments of both sides and also the entire evidence on record, convicted accused under Sec. 235(2) of Cr.P.C and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.5,000.00, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of I.P.C. Aggrieved by the said judgment, accused preferred the present appeal.

(3.) Learned counsel for accused contended that the trial Court erred in placing reliance on the interested and discrepant testimony of P.Ws.1, 2, 3, 5 and 7. He further contended that FIR was brought into light after deliberation only with abnormal delay i.e., on the next day and FIR was manipulated with anti-time. P.Ws.3, 5 and 7 did not support the case of the prosecution and the motive is very vague. The marriage of the deceased and accused was love marriage which is against the wishes of family members and thus falsely implicated the accused in this case. There is no positive evidence that accused was in the house at the time of the incident. The medical evidence did not support the case of the prosecution. The case of the prosecution would not fall under the ambit of Sec. 302 I.P.C, as the alleged incident took place during the quarrel between accused and the deceased. Therefore, requested this Court to set aside the judgment.