Telangana High Court
CRLA/310/2007 of Nuthalapati Venkateswara Rao (A-1) Vs State of A.P., on 30 December 2013
SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.310 of 2007 Dated 30th December, 2013 Between : N.Venkateswar Rao & others … Appellants a n d State of A.P. … Respondent-State THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.310 of 2007 JUDGMENT: The present Criminal
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGOCRIMINAL APPEAL No.310 of 2007
Dated 30[th] December, 2013
Between :
N.Venkateswar Rao & others
… Appellants
a n d
State of A.P.
… Respondent-State
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGOCRIMINAL APPEAL No.310 of 2007
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
JUDGMENT:
The present Criminal Appeal has been preferred by theappellants-accused challenging the judgment dated 28.02.2007rendered in S.C.No.42 of 2001 by the Special Judge for trial of casesunder SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989-cum-I Additional Sessions Judge,Khammam, whereby and whereunder the learned Sessions Judgeconvicted A1, A3, A4, A7, A12, A14 and A15 under section 235 (2)Cr.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for oneyear each for the offence under section 147 IPC and also to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 4 years each and pay a fine of Rs.100/- each for the offence undersection 325 IPC, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for onemonth each, while acquitting A.1, A.3, A.4, A.7, A.12, A.14 and A.15not guilty for the offence under sections 324, 336, 452, 307, 427 IPCand 3 (1) (x) of SCs & STs (POA) Act and also acquitting A.2, A.5, A.6,A.8 to A.11, A.13, A.16 to A.51 under section 235 (1) Cr.P.C. for the charges levelled against them.
The case of the Prosecution is that on 07.01.2001 at 0830 hours A.1, A.3 to A.26 and others formed into an unlawfulassembly armed with crowbars, sticks and attacked one BathulaSyamsunder Rao and beat him with deadly weapons near GilakalaBavee. After he fell unconscious, accused left. Accused persons alsoattacked the houses of Marri Gopaiah, Marri Narasaiah andBasapongu Nagamma, who belong to scheduled caste, damageddoors of the houses and they also beat S.Venkaiah, N.Suguna,D.Laxmi, defacto complainant and others when they tried to rescueSyamasunder Rao.
Basing on the complaint filed by the de facto complainant, PoliceChinthakani registered a case in crime No.4 of 2001 and aftercompletion of investigation they filed charge sheet against A.1 to A.51for the offence under sections 147, 148, 324, 325, 336, 452, 307 and427 read with 149 IPC against A.11, A.20 to A.24, A.31, A.36, A.37,A.41 and A.46 and under sections 147, 148, 324, 325, 326, 452, 307and 427 read with 149 IPC and section 3 (1) (x) (vx) of SCs & STs(POA) Act against other accused, which was taken cognizance by theII Additional JFMC, Khammam, in PRC No.59 of 2001 and committedto the Court of Sessions, who made over the case to the Court ofSpecial Judge for Trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 (IAdditional Sessions Judge) Khammam for disposal in accordance withlaw.
The learned trial Judge framed charge under Sections 148, 324,325, 336, 452, 307 and 427 r/w 149 IPC against A.1 to A.51 and acharge under Section 3 (1) (x) of SCs & STs (POA) Act against A.1 toA.10, A.12 to A.19, A.25 to A.30, A.32 to A.35, A.38 to A.40, A.42 toA.45, A.47 to A.51 to which the accused denied the offence, pleadednot guilty and claimed for trial. Prosecution got examined PWs 1 to 21and marked Exs.P.1 to P.17 and M.Os.1 to 8 for proving the guilt of theaccused. Exs.D.1 to D.12 were marked on behalf of the accused.
During the trial, A.51 died. Hence, case against A.51 was abated.Heard both sides and perused the material on record.
After hearing the matter for sometime, when this Court informedthat this Court is not inclined to interfere with the conviction imposedby the trial Court since there is sufficient evidence on record forconvicting the accused, the learned counsel for the appellants fairlyconceded for the same, confined his arguments only to the extent ofsentence imposed by the trial Court and prayed this Court to take alenient view towards the appellants in imposition of sentence.
Present case is the outcome of group rivalry between two groupsbelonging to Telugu Desam Party of Ananthasagar village whereinone group headed by Syam Sunder Rao consists of scheduled castepeople whereas another group headed by A.2 consists of upper casteand some other people.
Considering existence of group rivalry between the parties, theoccurrence took place in the year 2000 and the submission of thelearned counsel for the appellants that presently both the parties areliving amicably, this Court is of the view that a lenient view can betaken towards appellants in imposition of sentence.
Therefore, the conviction imposed on the appellants by the trialCourt is hereby confirmed. However, the sentence of imprisonmentimposed on the appellants for the offence under Sections 147 and 325IPC is hereby reduced to that of the period already undergone by themin prison. Further, the appellants shall pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each forthe offence under Section 147 IPC and Rs.2,500/- each for the offenceunder Section 325 IPC on or before 15[th] February, 2014, before thetrial Court, in default they shall undergo simple imprisonment for sixmonths under each count. Remaining portion of the impugnedjudgment holds good.
With above modification in sentence imposed on the appellants, the Criminal Appeal is disposed of.
Miscellaneous petitions pending in this appeal, if any, shallstand closed.
_________________________
JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO
30[th] December, 2013.PNV / SUR