CRIMINAL APPEAL 858 of 2017 on 25 November 2012

1. The State of AP.,rep., by its Public Prosecutor High Court of AndhraPradesh at Amaravathi.Pradesh at Amaravathi.

2. Yelamanchili Balakrishna, S/o. Guruvulu, R/o. B.G.Palem Village,Garividi Mandal, Vizianagaram District.Garividi Mandal, Vizianagaram District.

3. Bandapu Ramana, S/o.Chinappayya, R/o. B.G.Palem Village, GarividiMandal, Vizianagaram District.

4. Dasari Yenkanna, S/o. Late Ramulu, R/o. B.G.Palem Village, GarividiMandal, Vizianagaram District.

5. Sabbi Satyanarayana, S/o. Rarnunaidu, R/o. B.G.Palem VillagejGarividi Mandal, Vizianagaram District.

6. Muddada Laxmi, W/o. Sanyasappadu, R/o. B.G.Palem Village, GarividiMandal, Vizianagaram District;

7. Padala Appala Naidu, S/o.Bhusaiah, R/o. B.G.Palem Village, GarividiMandal, Vizianagaram District.

(The other Respondents are not necessary parties in this appeal)

t

...RESPOE)ENTS / ACCISED Mp. 1,3,4,10,21 and 26

Counsel for the Appellant: SRI. B V RAM NARESH KUMARCounsel for the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)Counsel for the Respondents: SMT. T V SRI DEVIThe Court made the following ORDER

APHC010382292017IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRAPRADESHAT AMARAVATI(Special Original Jurisdiction)

THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARYTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDYTHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHARCRIMINAL APPEAL No.858/2017

Between:

Smt Pitta Kanakamma, Vizianagaram Dt.,

...APELLANT

AND

The State Of Ap Rep Pp And 6 Otrs andOthers

...RESPODENT(S)

Counsel for the Apellant:

1. B V RAM NARESH KUMAR

2. LEGAL AID

Counsel for the Respodent(S):

1. TVSRI DEVI

2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDYAND

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

CRIMINAL APPEAL No.858/2017

JUDGMENT:-(per Hon’ble Sri Justice T.C.D. Sekhar)

1. Questioningthe Judgmentofacquittalpassedbylearned Judge, Family Court-cum-lll Additional Sessions[Judge,]Vizianagaram (for short, the Trial Court) in Sessions[Case][ No.][ 100]of 2014,dt.30.04.2016, onePitta Kanakamma motherof thedeceased (LW-33)filedthepresent Criminal AppealagainstAccused Nbs.1,3, 4, 10, 21 and 26.

2. Accused Nos.1, 3, 4, 10, 21 and 26 were tried by[the]Trial Court under six charges. The first charge was[under][ Section]147 read with. 149 IPC against all the accused.The[second]charge was under Section 148 read with 149 IPC against[all][ the]accused. The third charge was under Section 302 read[with][ 149]IPC against A1 to A4, A10, A21 and A26. The fourth[charge][ was]under Section 324 read with 149 IPC against A1, A4,[A12, A17,]A20 to A24. The fifth charge was under Section 307[read][ with]

149 IPC against A10 and A14. The sixth charge was under Section 323 read with 149 IPC against A5 to A9, All, A13, A15A17to A20 and A24 toA27.

3. Substance of the chargesis that on 25.11.2012 atabout 07:00 am,all the accused formed into unlawful assemblyand participatedinrioting andin furtherance of their[common]object, they beat PW-1and also beat onePitta Ramakrishna(hereinafter referred to as deceased) with sticks and[iron][ rods][ on]hisheadandbody,causinghisdeath,therebycommittedoffences under Sections 147, 148, 307, 323, 324 and[302][ read]with 149 IPC.

4. After completion of trial, the accused were found[not]guiltyfortheoffenceschargedandaccordinglytheywereacquitted. Aggrieved by the same,LV\/-33 (Pitta Kanakamma),who is mother of the deceased filed the present Criminal Appeal.

5. Caseof theprosecutionasculledoutfromtheevidence of prosecution witnesses is as follows:evidence of prosecution witnesses is as follows:

6. All the accused are residents of B.G. Palem Village, GarividiMandal.A-1(A.Balakrishna) andLW-29(MuddadaRamana)wereclosefriends.SchoolCommitteeelectiontoM.P.P. Elementary School, B.G.Palem was heldin November, 2011, in which A-1 was unanimously elected as Chairman of theSchool which was not liked by his friend LW-29.After becomingChairman, A-1started to show hissupremacyin the Village,thereby differences started between A-1 and LW-29.In view ofthe same, the Villagers formed into two (02) groups, one headedby A1 and the another headed by LW-29.

7. In the month of February, 2012, A-1 got preparedschool name board with the help of Headmaster (LW-17).[On]26.02.2012, one Bagu Asirappudu (LW-6) member of LW-29group touchedthe school nameboard andthe same wasquestioned by A-1. On that, altercation took place,in which A-1beat LW-6 and inflicted injuries. A criminal case vide Crime No.21of 2012 of Garividi Police Station was registered against[A-1]toA-6 under Sections 324 and 323 read with Section 34I PC.

8. On 23.08.2012, a dispute arose between A-1 groupand LW-29 group,in which A-1 group members attackedthegroup of LVy-29 and in that connection a case in Crime No. 102 of2012 of Garividi Police Station was registered under Sections 323and 324 read with Section 34 IPC.and LW-29 group,in which A-1 group members attackedthegroup of LVy-29 and in that connection a case in Crime No. 102 of2012 of Garividi Police Station was registered under Sections 323and 324 read with Section 34 IPC.

9. In view of frequent quarrels between the two groups,107 Cr.P.C. were also bookedsecurity cases under Sectionfor maintaining peace and public tranquillityagainst both groupsin the village.

10. In order to compromise between the two (02) groups,the Village elders wanted to hold a meeting on 25.11.2012in theschool building. On the said date, at about 07:00 am,[both][ groups]stallbesideCheepurupalli-RajamRoadatgatheredatteaeach other for theB.G.Palem and started throwing blames onprevious disputes, in which both the groups exchangedheatedwords and pushed each other. Later, all the accused[inciuding][ the]deceasedrushed to their respective houses situated beside theroad and took up deadly weapons like sticks, iong spades,ironrods, stones etc. and formed themselves into unlawful[assembly]with commonobject to attack and kill other group members. Inthe said processboth the groups started attacking each other atNaidu Street, B.G. Palem at about 07:30 am. A free[fight][ took]place between two groups and in the said attack, thedeceasedwas beaten by A1 with a stick on his head, A-2 and[A-3][ beat][ the]deceased on his head with iron rod, A-21 beat the deceasedonhis head with a sharp wooden piece and A-26 beat onhis head

With iron rod in front the house of Muddada Pydithalli (LW-19) andcausedfatalinjuries.A-1alsobeatMuddadaNela @Neelakantam (LW.1) on head and back, Korada Rajeswari (LW-2) on head and face, Korada Madhavi (LW.3) on head and righthandwrist,Bagu Asirappadu(LW-6)onleftleg,MuddadaLakshmi (LW-9) on right shoulder with a stout stick and inflictedinjuries. A4 beat Korada Rajeswari (LW-2) with a stick on body,A10 beat Muddada Neela @ Neelakantam (LW-1) on head[with]an iron rod, A12 beat Muddada Suribabu (LW-4) with[stick][ on][ left]side of head, A-14 beat Muddada Suribabu (LW-4) on[head][ with]anironrod and causedbleedinginjuries, A16 beat[Vakada]Ramarao @ Gollodu (LW-7) with stick on left shoulder,[A17][ beat]Muddada Neela @ Neelakantam (LW-1) on head with stick,[A20]beat Muddada Suribabu (LW-4), Vakada Ramarao @ Gollodu(LW-7) with a teak woodstick on their heads, and BandapuSuryanarayana(LW-8)withstoneonhands,A21alsobeatKorada Rajeswari (LW-2) on right hand, Korada Madhavi (LW-3)on left hand and Muddada Suribabu (LW-4) on head with a sharpwooden piece. A22 beat Korada Rajeswari (LW-2) with[a][ stick][ on]left shoulder, A23 beat Korada Rajeswari (LW-3) andKoradaMadhavi (LW-3) on right leg and right hand respectively[with][ a]

wooden piece. A24 beat Korada Madhavi (LW-3) and MuddadaLakshmi(LW-9) with astickonbackandlefthandfingersrespectively with a stick and caused injuries. The[other][ accused]pelted stones and caused injuries to LWs 1 to 14. The[deceased]sustained severe injuries and on the same night, he[succumbed]totheinjurieswhileundergoingtreatmentatK.G.Hospital,Visakhapatnam.

11. On 25.11.2012 at about 07:00 am, Sub-Inspector[of]Police (PW-20) rushed to the Village along with his[staff][ and][ at]that time, someof theinjured persons were shiftedto CHCCheepurupalli.Hedeputed Assistant Sub-InspectorofPolice(LW-47)totheHospitaltorecordstatementsof theinjuredpersons. On the same day at about 11:15 am, (LW-47)[informed]himthat,herecordedthe statementsof PW-1.ImmediatelyPW-20 returned to police station and registered a case[in][ Crime]No.142 of 2012 under Sections 147, 148, 307, 324 and[323][ read]with Section 149 IPC and sent copies of FIR to all[the][ concerned.]Ex.P-28 is statement of PW-1 and Ex.P-29 is FIR.

12. Thereafter, PW-20 took-up investigation. The injurec^PW-1wasshiftedtoGovernmentHeadQuartersHospital,PW-1wasshiftedtoGovernmentHeadQuartersHospital, Vizianagaram, for better treatment. He also recorded statementsof PWs-1to3. He went to B.G.Palem Village and securedmediators LW-36 and LW-37 anddrafted scene observationreport. Later on the next day, he came to know that the deceaseddied and LW-47 altered the sectionof law by incorporatingSection 302 through a Memo. Ex.P-30 is altered FIR. PW-20 heldinquest over the dead body of the deceased. Ex.P1is inquestreport. Thereafter, PW-20 handed over investigation[to][ PW-21.]

13. On 26.11.2012, PW-19received requisition fromPW-20to conduct post-mortem over the deadbodyofthedeceased. Accordingly, PW-19 conducted autopsy andfoundexternal and internal injuries and opined that the cause of deathwas due to head injury.PW-20to conduct post-mortem over the deadbodyofthedeceased. Accordingly, PW-19 conducted autopsy andfoundexternal and internal injuries and opined that the cause of deathwas due to head injury.

14. Later PW-21 took up investigation and arrested A1and A2 on 27.11.2012, he also arrested A6, A20, A21 and A24 on28.11.2012 and later during the course of investigation,[he][ also]arrested the remaining accused and seized the material objectsMos.1 to 14 and sent the same to RFSL. RFSL report[is][ marked]as EX.P43. PWs-16 to 18 issued wound certificates of LWs.1 to 5,which were marked as Exs.P-45 to 49. PW-20 prepared a roughsketch, whichis marked as Ex.P-44. After receipt of[wound]and A2 on 27.11.2012, he also arrested A6, A20, A21 and A24 on28.11.2012 and later during the course of investigation,[he][ also]arrested the remaining accused and seized the material objectsMos.1 to 14 and sent the same to RFSL. RFSL report[is][ marked]as EX.P43. PWs-16 to 18 issued wound certificates of LWs.1 to 5,which were marked as Exs.P-45 to 49. PW-20 prepared a roughsketch, whichis marked as Ex.P-44. After receipt of[wound]

certificates and post mortemcertificate, LW-50 filed a chargesheet against the accused.

15. In support ofitscase,theprosecution examinedPWs-1 to 22 and got marked Exs.P1 to 49 and exhibited[Mos.1][ to]14.PWs-1 to 22 and got marked Exs.P1 to 49 and exhibited[Mos.1][ to]14.

16. When the accused were examined under Section 313Cr.PC they denied the incriminating evidence found against themfrom the prosecution witnesses and reported no evidence.

17. Afterhearingthematter,thelearnedAdditionalSessions Judge acquitted the accused.Sessions Judge acquitted the accused.

18. Heard Sri B.V.Ram Naresh Kumar, learned counselfor the appellant, Sri Marri Venkata Ramana, learned[Additional]PublicProsecutorrepresentingthe1®* respondent-StateandSmt.T.V. Srivedi, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2[to][ 7.]for the appellant, Sri Marri Venkata Ramana, learned[Additional]PublicProsecutorrepresentingthe1®* respondent-StateandSmt.T.V. Srivedi, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2[to][ 7.]

19. We have carefully analyzed the entire evidence onrecord.record.

20. All the injured witnessesi.e., PWs-1to 15 turnedhostile and they did not attribute any specific overt acts againstthe accused.PWs-1to15alsocategoricallystatedintheirhostile and they did not attribute any specific overt acts againstthe accused.PWs-1to15alsocategoricallystatedintheir evidence that the accused are not responsible for the[death][ of][ the]deceased. Therefore, the evidence of PWs-1 to 15 is not helpfulto prove the case of prosecution. PWs-16to 18 areMedicalOfficers, who treated the injured witnesses and issued[wound]certificates.On perusal of the evidence of PWs-16 to 18,itisiclear that theinjuriesare simplein nature and theyfurtherdeposed that, the injuries could be possibleif a person[falls][ on]roughsurface.Therefore,theevidenceofMedicalOfficers(PWs-16to18)isalsonothelpfultoprovethecaseofprosecution.

21. PW19 - Medical Officer, who conducted autopsy overthe dead body of the deceased, opined that the cause[of][ death]was due to head injury. Therefore, the evidence of[PW-19][ is][ also]not helpful to prove the case of prosecution. PW-20[and][ PW-21]are Police Officers, who investigated the case and[arrested][ the]accused. Their evidence is also not helpful to the prosecution.

22. Admittedly, thereis no eye witness to the incident.Apartfromthe same,allthematerialprosecutionwitnessesturned hostile and did not support the case of the prosecution.The evidence of official witnesses PWs-16 to 22 is not sufficientto establish the case of prosecution.

23. Further, on a perusal of the evidence adduced by the

prosecution,it could not able to establish the role of the accusedto prove the injuries sustained by PWs-1 to 15 and[also][ the][ death]of the deceased. Though, PWs-l to 14 received injuries, they didnot attribute any specific overt act against the accused.

24. Furtheraspointedoutalltheinjuredwitnessesexamined as PW-1 to PW-15 did not support the prosecution[as]such the prosecution is not able to prove the guilty[of][ the][ accused]beyond reasonable doubt.examined as PW-1 to PW-15 did not support the prosecution[as]such the prosecution is not able to prove the guilty[of][ the][ accused]beyond reasonable doubt.

25. From the above,it is clear that, there is no iota ofevidenceagainsttheaccusedandintheabsenceofanyevidence supporting the case of the prosecution, the accused areentitled for acquittal such the judgment passed by[the][ learned]Judge,FamilyCourt-cum-lllAdditionalSessionsJudge,Vizianagaram needs no interference as no illegality[has][ been]noticed in the same.evidenceagainsttheaccusedandintheabsenceofanyevidence supporting the case of the prosecution, the accused areentitled for acquittal such the judgment passed by[the][ learned]Judge,FamilyCourt-cum-lllAdditionalSessionsJudge,Vizianagaram needs no interference as no illegality[has][ been]noticed in the same.

26. In viewof the above,therearenogroundstointerfere with the Judgment of acquittal dt.30.04.2016 passed inSC No. 100 of 2014, on the file of the Court of Learned Judge,Family Court-cum-lll Additional Sessions Judge, Vizianagaram.Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed.interfere with the Judgment of acquittal dt.30.04.2016 passed inSC No. 100 of 2014, on the file of the Court of Learned Judge,Family Court-cum-lll Additional Sessions Judge, Vizianagaram.Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed.

As asequel,pendingapplications,if any,shallstand closed.

SDI- E.KAMESWARA RAQJOINT REGISTRAR//TRUECOPY//SECfioi^^FFICER

To,

1. The Judge Family Court-Ill Additional Sessions Judge, Vizianagaram(with records if any)2.The First Class Judicial Magistrate, Cheepurupalli3.The Inspector of Police Cheepurupalli Police Station, VizianagaramDistrict4.One CC to Sri B V Ram Naresh Kumar Advocate [OPUC]5.One CC to Smt. T V Sri Devi Advocate [OPUC]6.Two CCs to the Public ProsecMor Fligh Court of Andhra[Pradesh][ at]Amaravathi [OUT]7.The Section Officer, Criminal Section, High Court of[Andhra][ Pradesh][ at]Amaravathi

8. THREE CD COPIESpsrTAG;-AV*

HIGH COURTDATED:30/01/2025

ORDERCRLA.No.858 of 20171* JUt 2025m;.Current Section DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL APPEAL