APHC010465432017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3528] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 492/2017 Between: 1. BUSA SRINU, VISAKHAPATNAM.,, S/O. LATE PEDDA VENKATARAMANA AGED ABOUT: 35 YRS, OCC: PRIVATE EMPLOYEE R/O AKKIREDDIPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM. ...APPELLANT AND 1. UGGINA VENKATA RAO VISAKAPATNAM 2 OTRS REP PP, S/O DEMUDU, AGED ABOUT: 34 YRS, OCC: AUTO DRIVER, R/O BANDAVANIPALEM VILLAGE, RAJIYYAPETA PANCHAYAT, PENDURTHI MANDAL, ' VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 2. UGGINA DEMUDU, S/O LATE CHINNAIAH AGED ABOUT; 55 YRS, OCC: CULTIVATION R/O BANDAVANIPALETH VILLAGE, RAJIYYAPETA-PANCHA.YAT, PENDURTHI MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 3. THE STATE OF A P, REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH. ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 KSR,J& VS,J Crla_492_2017 Appeal under Section 372/374(2)/378(4) of Cr.P.C praying that the High Court may be pleased to to present this Memorandum of Criminal Appeal against the Judgment passed in S.C.No.54 of 2012 or the file of on the file of Special Judge to try offences under Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act-Cum-1st Additional District & o Session Judge-Cum- Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam dt. 17.02.2017 acquitting the accused, for the following among other: IA NO: 1 OF 2017(CRLAMP 1022 OF 2017 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant special leave to the petitioner for filing of the criminal appeal against the order dated 26-9-2014 on the file of the Spl.Judge to try offences under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act-cum-1st Addl. District and Sessions Judge-cum-M.S.J, Visakhapatnam dated 17-2-2017, pending disposal of the Crl.A. in this Hon'ble Court. IA NO: 2 OF 2017(CRLAMP 13870 OF 2017 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Counsel for the Appellant: 1. C BALAJEE Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. RAVURI LEELA SAI SAMPATH 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice V. Sujatha) Accused No.1 in S.C.No.54 of 2012 on the file of Court of Metropolitan Sessions Judge – cum – I Additional District and Sessions Judge, 3 KSR,J& VS,J Crla_492_2017 Visakhapatnam is the appellant. He along with A2 was tried and acquitted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge under Section 302 read with 34 IPC. 2. Gravamen of the charge is that on 27.09.2010, at about 03.00 p.m., both the accused attacked one Busa Peda Venkata Ramana (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’) with a stout stick near the house of one Gompa Atchayyamma of Bandavanipalem while the deceased was going to Akkireddipalem village, causing his death, thereby committed offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 IPC. 3. Case of the prosecution, as emanated from the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in brief is as follows: (i) The deceased is a resident of Akkireddipalem, Gurrampalem panchayat, Pendurthi mandal, Visakhapatnam district. A1 is also a resident of Akkireddipalem. A2 is the father of A1. P.Ws.1 and 3 are the children of the deceased. The marriage of P.W.3 was solemnized with A1 on 23.11.2001 and they were blessed with two children. Subsequently, A1 started harassing P.W.3 both physically and mentally, suspected her fidelity. A2 along with the younger brother of A1 also harassed P.W.3. Three years prior to the date of incident, as the deceased questioned A1 about the harassment meted out to P.W.3, A1, using a piece of fire wood, beat the deceased on his head, causing 4 KSR,J& VS,J Crla_492_2017 bleeding injury. Thereafter, P.W.4 and other village elders intervened and resolved the issue. (ii) While so, on 26.09.2007, A1 beat P.W.3, in the presence of his family members, as such, P.W.3 gave a report to Pendurthi Police on 02.10.2007, against A1, A2 and younger brother of A1. A case was registered against the accused in Crime No.342 of 2007 by P.W.13 –S.I. of Police. In the said case, after completion of investigation and after filing of charge sheet, A1 was convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment by the learned I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam. As such, A1 sought divorce from P.W.3, to which the deceased and P.W.3 opposed. As the deceased became an obstacle for A1 to obtain divorce from P.W.3, A1, along with A2 hatched a plan to kill the deceased. (iii) On 27.09.2010, the deceased went towards power office situated on the other side of the state highway to fetch grass and while returning to his house in Akkireddipalem on his motorcycle bearing No.AP 31 AS 4961 with a bundle of green grass tied on the back side of the motorcycle, at about 03.00 p.m., and when he reached near the house of Gompa Atchayyamma, A1 and A2 stopped the deceased and picked up a quarrel with him. At that juncture, A1 beat the deceased with a stout stick on his head; in an attempt to defend himself, the deceased took a sickle from the bundle of grass and dealt a blow 5 KSR,J& VS,J Crla_492_2017 on the head of A1 causing bleeding injury. Then, A2 caught hold of the deceased and A1 beat the deceased repeatedly on his head, due to which, the deceased fell down on the road, bleeding profusely from his head and died on the spot. A1 and A2 fled away from the scene of offence, with the stout stick. Thereafter, A1 went to K.G. Hospital, Visakhapatnam to undergo treatment. (iv) Upon receiving information, P.W.1 rushed to the scene of offence and found the deceased lying on the road in a pool of blood. At about 04.30 p.m., P.W.1 gave a report to P.W.15 – S.I. of Police, who registered a case in Crime No.376 of 2010, under Section 302 read with 34 IPC. He furnished copies of FIR to all the concerned. FIR is marked as Ex.P.12. After informing P.W.16 – Assistant Commissioner of Police (North), P.W.15 went to the scene of offence. Thereafter, P.W.16 took up further investigation. On 27.09.2010, after receipt of information, P.W.16 went to the scene of offence and in the presence of P.W.7 and another, he prepared a scene observation report, which is marked as Ex.P.13. He seized M.O.2 (slippers), M.O.8 (sickle), M.O.9 (blood stained towel), M.O.10 (black color hair), M.O.11 (pieces of cement controlled Earth) and M.O.12 (blood stained Earth). He got the scene of offence photographed. He prepared a rough sketch, which is marked as Ex.P.14. He secured the presence of P.Ws.1, 11 and another and recorded their statements. On 28.09.2010, after securing the presence of P.Ws.2, 3 and 6 KSR,J& VS,J Crla_492_2017 others, P.W.16 conducted inquest. Ex.P.3 is inquest report. He sent the dead body for post mortem examination. (v) On 28.09.2010, P.W.9 – Assistant Professor, Forensic Medicine, AMC, Visakhapatnam conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased and opined the cause of death was due to head injury. He issued postmortem certificate, which is marked as Ex.P.8. (vi) On 29.09.2010, P.W.16 apprehended both the accused at Pendurthi junction in the presence of mediators and recorded their confessional statements. Ex.P.15 is the confessional statement of the accused. Basing on the confessional statement, P.W.16 recovered M.O.4 (lavu karra) and M.Os.5 to 7 (blood stained clothes of A2). He sent all the material objects to RFSL, Visakhapatnam. Ex.P.9 is RFSL report. After receiving postmortem report, RFSL report and after completion of investigation, P.W.16 filed charge sheet. 4. In support of its case, the prosecution examined P.Ws. 1 to 16, marked exhibits P1 to P17 and exhibited M.Os.1 to 12. When A1 was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., he denied the incriminating material appearing against him and further stated that on the date of incident, while he was walking on the road, the deceased came on a motorcycle, stopped the motorcycle, 7 KSR,J& VS,J Crla_492_2017 engaged the stand and attacked him with a sickle, due to which, he lost his consciousness and does not know what happened thereafter. 5. After analyzing the entire evidence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge found the accused not guilty and acquitted them. 6. On 19.06.2025, this Court has directed the Registry to issue notice to respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein, pursuant to which, a letter dated 15.07.2025 was addressed by the learned I Additional District and Sessions judge-cum- Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam, stating that the notice was served on the 1st respondent, but, the notice sent to 2nd respondent was returned stating that he died on 04.04.2017. As such, the present appeal is dismissed as abated with respect to the 2nd respondent herein. Further, as there was no representation on behalf of the appellant in the earlier occasions and as the appeal is against the judgment of acquittal, we have requested the learned Additional Public Prosecutor to assist the Court in the case on hand. 7. Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the complainant/appellant. We have carefully analyzed the entire evidence on record. 8. During the course of arguments, learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently contended that the learned Additional Sessions Judge erred in acquitting the accused. He further contended that the learned Additional 8 KSR,J& VS,J Crla_492_2017 Sessions Judge ought to have taken into consideration the evidence of P.W.5, who is a crucial eye-witness in the case on hand. He further relied upon the evidence of P.W.8, who categorically held that the deceased succumbed to head injury. As such, he requested this Court to set-aside the judgment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and to convict the accused for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 IPC. 9. It is the evidence of P.W.1 – elder son of the deceased, that the marriage of P.W.3, who is his younger sister, was solemnized with A1 in the year 2001 and they were blessed with two children. Thereafter, suspecting the fidelitiy of P.W.3, A1 used to beat P.W.3 in drunken condition. Three years prior to the date of incident, when the deceased enquired A1 as to why he is frequently harassing his daughter (P.W.3), A1 beat the deceased with a fire wood, on his head causing severe injury. Thereafter, in the presence of elders, the issue was resolved. He further stated that, subsequently, both P.W.3 and A1 lived happily for a short period, but, as A1 started harassing P.W.3 again, she left the matrimonial house and started living separately. As such, A1 sought divorce, which was rejected by P.W.3 with the support of the deceased. P.W.1 categorically stated that A1 used to threaten the deceased of killing, if he would not allow her daughter to divorce him. He further stated that, upon hearing the cries of P.W.2, he got to know about the incident and 9 KSR,J& VS,J Crla_492_2017 immediately rushed to the scene of offence, where he saw the dead body of his father in a pool of blood. Thereafter, he reported the incident to the Police. 10. Admittedly, P.Ws.2, 5 and 11 were projected as eye-witnesses to the incident. It is the evidence of P.W.2, who is the sister in law of the deceased, that on the date of incident, at about 03.00 p.m., she went to Nookalamma temple and at that juncture, having heard shouts and quarrels, she went near the said temple, where she saw a group of people gathered together. She further stated that she too went there and saw A1 and deceased fighting with each other. Scared by the said incident, in order to bring her husband and family members of the deceased, she left the place and enroute her house, she raised shouts citing about the fight between A1 and deceased. It is her further evidence that when she returned to the scene of offence along with her husband and children of the deceased (including P.W.1), she was surprised to see the dead body of the deceased. However, P.W.2 was declared hostile. 11. P.W.5, who is a resident of Akkireddipalem and is well acquainted with the accused and the deceased, in his evidence has stated that on 27.09.2010, at about 03.00 p.m., while he was trying to park his car in the shed situated near Nookalamma temple, he saw P.W.2 running and shouting that A1, A2 are killing the deceased at Bandamvanipalem. Upon hearing the same, he parked his car and rushed towards Bandamvanipalem by running and at the 10 KSR,J& VS,J Crla_492_2017 border of both the villages, he noticed the deceased lying on the road oozing blood from nose and ears. He further stated that he saw both the accused running towards their house and that A1 was carrying stout stick. But, however, in the cross examination, he stated that the scene of offence is not visible from Nookalamma temple due to the corner by the side of Nookalamma temple and that the distance of Nookalamma temple is about 20 feet from the scene of offence. He further deposed that he saw both the accused from behind at a distance of 10 or 15 feet and that he was able to identify them as the accused are familiar to him. 12. As already stated earlier, A1, in his examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C., has deposed that the deceased attacked him with a sickle, due to which he fell unconscious and does not know what happened thereafter. It can be seen from the evidence of P.W.8 – Casual Medical Officer, KGH, Visakhapatnam that on 27.09.2010, at 03.00 p.m., A1 visited his hospital along with one M. Srinivasa Rao and complained about the injuries sustained by him due to the attack by a known person with sickle. Upon examining A1, P.W.8 found a laceration on the scalp extending from frontal area to occipital region on the right side and another laceration on the right side of parietal region. P.W.8 further deposed that the said injuries could be caused with a sharp object like M.O.10 and issued Ex.P.7 (wound certificate). As such, the fact that A1 sustained injuries in the said incident cannot be doubted. 11 KSR,J& VS,J Crla_492_2017 13. It can further be seen from Ex.P.13 – scene observation report, that the motorcycle of the deceased bearing No.AP 31 AS 4961, was parked with its center stand engaged. Had it been true that both the accused attacked the deceased while the deceased was riding the said motorcycle, the said motorcycle would have fallen down, but, instead, the said motorcycle was parked with the center stand engaged, which would draw our attention to the statement deposed by the accused in Section 313 Cr.P.C., that he was attacked by the deceased with a sickle, as a result of which he fell unconscious. It is more plausible that the deceased, upon seeing A1, would have parked his motorcycle and would have attacked A1 with a sickle due to which, A1 lost his consciousness. In such a case, the version of P.W.5 that he saw both the accused running away from the scene of offence, raises a serious doubt. As such, we are unable to believe the evidence of P.W.5. 14. P.W.11, who was also projected as eye-witness to the incident has turned hostile. The remaining witnesses are all hearsay witnesses and have spoken about the earlier marital disputes between the deceased and the accused regarding the marriage of P.W.3. The prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The evidence of P.W.5, who is an alleged eyewitness, lacks credibility and does not inspire the confidence of this Court. Furthermore, the remaining alleged eyewitnesses i.e. P.Ws.2 and 11 have turned hostile. In the absence of any reliable and 12 KSR,J& VS,J Crla_492_2017 consistent evidence, particularly in the absence of a crucial eyewitness, the accused should not be convicted. 15. In view of the above facts and circumstances, we have no hesitation to come to the conclusion that the judgment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge need not be interfered with. 16. In the result, Criminal Appeal is dismissed, confirming the judgment of acquittal passed by learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge – cum – I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam in S.C.No.54 of 2012, dated 17.02.2017. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ___________________ K.SURESH REDDY, J _______________ V.SUJATHA, J Date:23.07.2025. Gss