PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Vs. CHITIKINA SUBBANNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondents who were accused 1, 3 and 4 in Sessions case No. 9 of 1945 in the Court of Session, West Godavari, were tried with the second accused on a charge under Section 302, Indian Penal Code read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code in respect of the murder of one Arupalli Nara-simhulu. The learned Sessions Judge convicted the second accused of murder and sentenced him to death; and that conviction and sentence were confirmed and his appeal was dismissed by this Court (Referred Trial No. 156 and Cr. App. No. 552 of 1945). The learned Judge held that the respondents were not guilty of murder. He convicted the first accused of causing grievous hurt and sentenced him to five ytars rigorous imprisonment and the other two accused of wrongful confinement ; sentence being one year's rigorous imprisonment each. They have not appealed but the Public Prosecutor, Madras, has filed this appeal against their acquittal on the charge of murder.

(2.) The case for the prosecution was that early in the morning of the 26 December,. 1944 while the deceased was taking fodder for his cattle to his field, accused 3 and 4 caught hold of him and accused 2 aimed a blow with a tree-tapper's knife at his throat. The deceased put up his left arm to ward off the blow and received on it three cuts. Accused 1 who also had a tapper's knife cut him on the left arm. The deceased raised an alarm as soon as he ws attacked and P.W. 2, his-brother, who was coming behind him as well as P.W. 3 of the neighbouring field who had joined P.W. 2 on the way came running and tried to intervene, but ran away as the first and second accused threatened to cut them. P.Ws. 4 and 5, who were-in the neighbouring fields, also came running and meeting P.W. 2 on the way learnt from him that the four accused were cutting the deceased. When they arrived on the scene, they saw the accused running away. They then chased the accused for some distance and then returned to the deceased. P.Ws. 6, 7, 9 and 10 also came to the scene of occurrence and to them the deceased Narasimhulu stated that the accused had cut him. The deceased was then taken to the hospital at Achanta, three miles from the scene, which he reached at 9 A.M. There were three injuries on the left arm and one on the right. All of them were incised wounds and one of the injuries on the left arm had cut the brachial artery and vein. Apprehending that this injury might prove fatal, P.W. 1, the doctor, sent for P.W. 12, the village headman, who had the dying declaration Ex. C recorded in his presence by the karnam P.W. 13. In that statement which is attested by the doctor, Narasimhulu implicated the four accused and described the parts played by them in the attack. He said that the third accused caught hold of him, that the second accused came with a tapper's knife, that then the fourth accused also came and caught hold of him, that on the second accused attempting to cut his throat with the knife he raised his hands to ward off the blow and received the cuts on his left hand. Then the first accused came and cut him on his right hand and on his raising an alarm P.W. 3 and others came and the accused ran away. Narasimhulu died the same day at 6-30 P.M. As already stated one of the injuries on the left arm had cut the brachial artery and vein. The injury inflicted by the first accused on the right arm had resulted in the fracture of the external condyle of the humerus. The postmortem examination disclosed that death was due to shock and haemorrhage resulting from the injuries.

(3.) An hour prior to the occurrence, P.W. 6, while going to his field that morning saw the four accused together at about 50 yards from the spot where the deceased was attacked; and an hour later he heard the deceased's cry. The accused were not available to the police that day but were arrested in their houses the next day. At about 10 a.m. on the day of occurrence accused 1 and 2 came to P.W. 14 the monigar of Achanta (it appears that there are three village officers besides the karnam for this village) and presented a complaint Ex. K, alleging that that morning while the four accused were in the tope of the first accused (the first accused is a renter of a toddy shop) the deceased, P.W. 2 and the others named in that complaint came in a body, that the deceased cui the second accused between the left thumb and forefinger and that P.W. 2 hit the fourth accused with a stick on his back and the third accused on his leg. The others who had come with the deceased and 9.W. 2 attempted to attack the accused with knives and sticks and so the accused ran away. There was a minor injury between the left thumb and forefinger of the second accused, which P.W. 14 noticed. P.W. 17, the investigating officer, also saw it, but it does not appear that the second accused was sent to the doctor. The injury was a trivial one. There were no injuries on the other accused.