APHC010183312018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 867 OF 2018 Appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C, against the judgment of the VI Additional Sessions Judge 28-02-2018. Kakinada in SC.No.300 of 2011 dated Between: Kadali Hanumantha Rao, s/o Yougandhar Rao, Aged 29 years, R/o.D.No. 1-139/D, Poleykuru Village, Thallarevu Mandal, East Godavari District. ...APPELLANT/ACCUSED AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Appellant C SHARAN REDDY : SRI MOHD. ISMAIL, REPRESENTING SRI Counsel for the Respondent : SRI MARRI VENKATA RAMANA ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following : APHC010183312018 high court of ANDHRA PRADESH at AMARAVATl (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT IN THE [3547] honourable SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI THE THE HONOURABLE SRI criminal appeal NO: 867/2011 ^"‘i^DALI HANUMANTHA RAO, R/0,D,N0.1-139/D„ POLEYKURU VILLAGE THALLAREVU MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...APELLANT AND ic Prosecutor, high Court of of Telangana and the state of STATE OF AP, rep. by the Public Judicature at Hyderabad for the state AP. ...RESPODENT Counsel for the Appellant: 1.C SHARAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent; 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 1 2 Crl.A.No.867 of 2018 The Court made the following: JUDGMENT ; (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.Suresh Reddy) Sole accused in Sessions Case No.300 of 2011 on the file of the Court of VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kakinada, is the appellant. He was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge under two charges. The 1®* charge was under Section 302 IPC and the 2'"'^ charge was under Section 307 IPC. Substance of the charge is that prior to 31.10.2010 at about 2.00 P.M. the accused stabbed one Mettapati Veera Venkata Satyanara (hereinafter referred to as ‘the deceased’) in the fields situated at Georgepeta village. Thallarevu Mandal, causing his death and in the he also attempted to kill P.Ws.l and 2, thereby 2. same process committed offences punishable under Sections. 302 and 307 IPC 3. After completion of trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, convicted the accused under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for ‘LIFE’ and also to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of two (02) months. Learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the accused for the offence under Section 307 IPC. Aggrieved by the same accused/appellant filed the present appeal. Case of prosecution, as emanated from the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, is as follows;- The accused is resident of Georgepeta village. P.W.1 is none the wife of the deceased and P.W.2 is paternal uncle of the 4. (i) other than Cii.A.No.867 of 2018 P.W.1. The deceased and P.W.1 used to live at Yanam of Pondicherrry State and eking out their livelihood by selling vegetables and fruits on cycle. About five months prior to the date of incident, they came down to Georgepeta and started cultivation of vegetable plants on the bund of canal known as “teki drain” and doing vegetable business. The said drain is situated after burial ground. The deceased raised vegetable plants near the house of the accused. The accused was having cattle and used to cultivate the land belonging to the Endowment Department. The deceased, P.Ws.1 and 2 used to look after the vegetable plants. On several occasions, the cattle of the accused damaged the vegetable plants. The deceased asked the accused to ensure that the cattle should not enter into his vegetable plantation. It is stated that regularly the cattle belonging to the accused used to cause damage to the vegetable plantation of the deceased. (ii) While so, on 31.10.2010 the deceased along with P.Ws.1 and 2 went to the vegetable plantation and found the vegetable plants were damaged by the cattle of the accused, who is residing adjacent to the said plantation. Immediately, the deceased questioned the accused. The deceased abused the accused in a filthy language. Then, there ensued heated exchange of words between the accused and the deceased. During the course of altercation, both of them used filthy language. Enraged by the altercation, the accused took out a knife and gave a blow on the neck of the deceased. When P.Ws.1 and 2 tried to interfere, the accused threatened them with dare consequences. The accused pushed the deceased into the agricultural canal. Due to fear and as there are no relatives in their village, P.Ws.1 and 2, went to their village-Karapa which is situated 27 kms away from the scene of offence and came back along with relatives. Thereafter, they went to 4 Cv Crl.A.No.867 of 2018 the police station and gave a report. At about 7.00 P.M. on the same day, P.W.11 S.l. of police, Corangi police station having received Ex.P1-report from P.Ws.1 and 2, registered a case in Crime No.135 of 2010 under Section 302 IPC. FIR is marked as Ex.P15. He issued copies of FIR to all the concerned. (iii) P.W.12 Inspector of police, Kakinada Rural went to the police station at about 7.30 P.M. and received copy of FIR and found P.Ws.1 and 2 at the police station. P.W.12 along with P.Ws.1, 2, 6, 7 and 11 proceeded to the scene of offence. As it was raining, he posted a guard and left the scene of offence. On the next day morning, at about 10.00 A.M., P.W.12 secured the presence of P.Ws.1, 2, 5 to 7 and went to the scene of offence where P.W.11 was already present. He prepared an observation report-Ex.P17 in the presence of P.Ws.6 and He got the dead body removed from the drain and placed on the gravel road with the help of P.Ws.6 and 7. He prepared a rough sketch-Ex.P16 at the scene of offence. He got photographed the of offence through P.W.5. Photographs and C.D. were marked EXS.P3 and P4. He seized M.Os.3 and 4 in the presence of P.Ws.6 He also collected 7. scene as and 7 under a cover of panchanama-Ex.P17. On the controlled earth and blood stained earth-M.Os.10 and 11. same day, he held inquest over the dead body in the presence of Inquest report is marked as Ex.P5. At the time of He sent the dead P.W.8-Professor, Rangaraya P.Ws.6 and 7. inquest, he recorded statements of P.Ws.1 to 4. body for post-mortem examination. Medical College, Kakinada conducted autopsy over the dead body. He opined the cause of death was due to stab injury on the left side of neck, cutting the main vessels of the neck and resulting shock and hemorrhage. He issued post-mortem certificate-Ex.P11. 5 Crl.A.No.867 of 2018 (iv) On 13.11.2010 P.W.12 arrested the accused at his hut in the presence of P.Ws.6 and 7. The accused said to have confessed about the commission of offence. In pursuance of his confession, M.0.1- knife was recovered from his hut and he also seized M.Os.2 and 7 under a cover of panchanama-Ex.P6. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that M.0.1-knife belonging to P.W.4 and the accused brought the same from P.W.4. P.W.4 identified M.0.1 in the Test Identification Parade conducted before P.Ws.6 and 7. The said Test Identification report is marked as Ex.P2. He sent the material objects to RFSL under a letter of advise-Exs.PIS and PI9. RFSL report is marked as Ex.P20. After receiving the documents and after completion of investigation, P.W.12 filed charge sheet. In support of its case, prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 12, marked Exs.P1 to P20 and exhibited M.Os.1 to 11. 5. When the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., he denied the incriminating evidence found against him. On behalf of defence, Ex.DI is marked. 6. Accepting the evidence of prosecution witnesses, the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the accused as aforesaid. 7. Heard Sri.Md Ismail, learned counsel, representing Sri.C.Sharan Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri.Marri Venkata Ramana, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent- State. 8. We have carefully perused the entire evidence on record. 9. 6 c. Crl.A.No.867 of 2018 P.W.1 is none other than the wife of the deceased. P.W.2 is the paternal uncle of P.W.1. categorically stated that on 31.10.2010 at about 2.00 P.M., they along with the deceased went to vegetable plantation and found the plants damaged by the cattle of the accused. They further stated that oftenly the cattle of the accused used to damage the vegetable plantation. As such, the deceased admonished the accused severely on the date of incident. P.Ws.1 and 2 in their evidence have specifically stated that both the accused and the deceased altercated with each other. In Ex.PI, P.W.1 has specifically stated that the accused as well as the deceased exchanged filthy language during the course of altercation. In Ex.PI, P.W.1 has specifically stated that by the time they went to the vegetable plantation, the accused was sitting in front of his hut having M.0.1-knife in his hand. It is the deceased and P.Ws.1 and 2 who went to the hut of accused, questioned him and altercated with him. Quarrel took place for some time and during the said quarrel, the accused dealt one blow with M.0.1-knife and pushed him into the field canal. As there are no relatives to P.Ws.1 and 2, they went to their native place Karapa village and came back along with relatives. On the same day, at about 7.00 P.M., P.Ws.1 and 2 went to the police station and gave Ex.PI-report and set the criminal law into motion. As such, P.Ws.1 and 2, being eye witnesses to the incident, have clearly narrated the entire attack made by the accused. As such, we have no hesitation to come to the conclusion that it is the accused, who caused injury on the neck of the deceased. 10. P.Ws.1 and 2 in their evidence have Coming to the nature of the offence, even according to the eye witnesses P.Ws.1 and 2, they along with the deceased went to the hut of the accused and admonished him severely. Both of them altercated 11. 7 Crl.A.No.867 of 2018 seriously by using filthy language and suddenly the accused dealt a blow with M.0.1-knife on the neck of the deceased. Even according to P.Ws.1 and 2, the accused dealt only one blow on the deceased preceded by a quarrel between both of them. As already pointed is P.Ws.1 and 2 and the deceased, who out, it went to the hut of the accused. As such. It cannot, by any stretch of imagination, be said that the accused was having intention to kill the deceased. As the attack proceeded by a quarrel using filthy language by both of them and during the course of quarrel the accused dealt only one blow with M.0.1-knife, in the considered opinion of this court the offence would certainly fall under Section 304 Part-ll IPC. 12. In view of the above facts and circumstances, allow the present Criminal Appeal in part by setting aside the conviction and sentence for the offence under Section accused is found guilty for the offence under Section 304 we are inclined to 302 IPC, instead the Part-ll IPC. 13. In the resuit, the Criminai Appeal is allowed in part by setting and sentence aside the conviction recorded against the and Sessions under appellant/accused by the learned VI Additional District Judge, Kakinada, in S.C.No.300 of 2011, dated 28.02.2018 Section 302 IPC. Instead, the appellant/accused is found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part-ll IPC and he is convicted and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for while maintaining the fine a period of ten (10) years amount. As the appellant/accused already released on bail by order, dated 26.07.2024 was in terms of the High Court in Batchu Pradesh in Crl.A.No.607 of 2011), he is directed order, dated 02.11.2016, passed by the Combined Rangarao and others Vs The State of Andhra (Crl.A.M.P.No.1687 of 2016 Crl.A.No.867 of 2018 to surrender before the trial Court to serve the remaining portion of sentence forthwith. Failing which, the learned VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kakinada, is directed to secure his presence by issuing N.B.W. and commit him to prison to serve the remaining portion of sentence. It is needless to state that the period of imprisonment already undergone by him shall be given set off under Section 428 Cr.P.C. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. SD/- S.V.S.R. MURTHY JOINT REGISTRAR SECTIO^FFICER //TRUE COPY// To, 1. The Vi Additional Sessions Judge, Kakinada, East Godavari District (with records) 2. The Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Prohibition and Excise, Kakinada, East Godavari District 3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Rajamahendravaram, Godavari District 4. The Station Flouse Officer,Coringa Police Station, East Godavari District 5. Kadali Hanumantha Rao, s/O Yougandhar Rao, Aged 29 years, R/o.D.No.1-139/D, Poleykuru Village, Thallarevu Mandal, East Godavari District. 6. One CC to Sri. C Sharan Reddy Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, Fligh Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi [OUT] 8. The Section Officer, Criminal Section, Fligh Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi 9. Two CD Copies East Stu TAC i i HIGH COURT DATED:10/09/2025 JUDGMENT CRLA NO. 867 OF 2018 o i m ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL APPEAL IN PART