APHC010800672017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3547] TUESDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 205/2018 Between: 1. S.RAMESH BABU, VANNEKULAKSHATRIYA, GATTAPPAANAYANAPPALLI, H/O. USRLAOBANAPALLI KUPPAM MANDAL. ...APELLANT AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHAR PRADESH, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor High Court at Hyderabad for the state of Telangana and for the state of ahdhara Pradesh Hyderabad. ...RESPODENT 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 is against SC No.5 of 2014 on the file of District and sessions Judge, at Chittoor dated 03-02-2015. IA NO: 1 OF 2017(CRLAMP 29310 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 pleased to condone the delay of 834 days in filing the present Criminal appeal, and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 condone the delay of 145 days in representing the Crl.A.(SR) No.27602 of 2017 before this Hon'ble Court and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 Pleased to suspend the execution of sentence passed in S.C.No. 5 of 2014 on the file of Ist Additional Sessions Judge FAC- District and Sessions Judge, Chittoor, Judgement Dated 05-02-2015 and release the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the above Crl.A.No. 205 of 2018 and to pass Counsel for the Apellant: 1. G VIJAYA SARADHI Counsel for the Respodent: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: APHC010112382018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3547] THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 205 of 2018 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice K Suresh Reddy) Sole accused in Sessions Case No.5 of 2014 on the file of the Court of District and Sessions Judge, Chittoor, filed the above criminal appeal. 2. He was tried and convicted by the learned I Additional Sessions Judge : (FAC) District and Sessions Judge, Chittoor, under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for ‘LIFE’ and also to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default, to undergo Simple Imprisonment for six months. 3. Gravamen of the charge is that on 05.08.2013 at about 5:30 P.M., the accused hacked his father, by name G. Sreeramulu (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) with a billhook and severed his head, in the red gram field of the deceased, situated at Mallammacheruvu near Gattappanayanipalli, Kuppam Mandal, thereby, committed the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. 4. Case of the prosecution, as emanated from the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, is: (i) The accused is none other than the son of the deceased through his first wife. PWs.2 and 3 are the third wife and daughter, respectively, of the deceased. PWs.4 to 6 are the coolies, who are working in the fields of the deceased at the time of the incident. The accused and PWs.2 and 3 are residents of Mallammacheruvu, and PWs.4 to 6 are residents of Gattappanayanipalli, Kuppam Mandal. The mother of the accused died during his childhood. After the death of his first wife, the deceased married another lady by name Basamma, who deserted him after two years. Again, the deceased married PW.2 as his third wife and they were blessed with two sons and a daughter, PW.3. There were disputes between the deceased and the accused regarding share in the property. The matter was placed before PW.7, who effected compromise. As per the compromise, the deceased and his father, Gajjulappa, were allotted Ac.0-42 cents each; Ac.0-25 cents was allotted to PW3 and Ac.0-54 cents of land each was allotted to the sons of the deceased, including the accused. Subsequently, the father of the deceased gifted his Ac.0-42 cents of land in favour of the accused and his brother, for which the deceased used to quarrel with the accused very often. (ii) While so, on 05.08.2013, at about 5:30 P.M., the accused was attending his agricultural works in the fields. At that juncture, the deceased came there and quarrelled with the accused, claiming the entire extent of land, which fell to the share of his father, Gajulappa. The accused quarrelled with the deceased for claiming the entire property and having enraged by the behaviour of the deceased, the accused brought a billhook from his house, situated near the fields and hacked the deceased repeatedly on his neck. Thereafter, the accused severed the head of the deceased from the trunk and took the head along with him to his house. The accused kept the head in a bag, left the house on his motorcycle, M.O.2., and went to the office of PW1, with blood-stained clothes. When PW1 questioned the accused, he stated that at 5:30 P.M., he had a quarrel with his father, at the fields in Gattapanayanapalle village near Mallamacheruvu, about the lands, he got enraged and killed his father with a billhook. He further stated that there were constant disputes between him and his father for a long time with regard to the lands. He also stated that he severed the head of his father and brought it in a plastic bag. Immediately, PW1 recorded statement of the accused, and he prepared a report (Ex.P1). PW1 took the accused to the police station and handed him over to the police, along with Ex.P1. (iii) On the same day at about 7:15 P.M. the Inspector of Police, PW12, Kuppam Circle, came to know through Sub-Inspector of Police, Kuppam, about the murder of the deceased and instructed the Sub- Inspector of Police to register a case under appropriate sections of law. At about 7:30 P.M., PW12 went to the Police Station and received a copy of F.I.R. in crime No.127 of 2013. The crime was registered by the Sub- Inspector of Police, Kuppam, on the basis of the report given by PW1. FIR is marked as Ex.P8. By the time PW12 went to the Police Station, PW1 and the accused, along with blood stains bag, were present there. PW12 took up investigation and recorded the statement of PW1. Thereafter, PW1 produced the accused along with the severed head and billhook. The Billhook is marked as M.O.1. PW12 verified the bag and found the severed head and billhook, M.O.1. He recorded the confession statement of the accused in the presence of PW8 and another. Ex.P2 is the confession statement. (iv) PW.12 seized M.O.1, billhook and also severed head along with the bag in the presence of PW8 and another. The bag is marked as M.O.3. He arranged separate clothes for the accused and seized the blood-stained clothes worn by him, which were marked as M.Os.4 and 5. Page 7 of 12 The towel of the accused is M.O.7. PW.12 also seized M.O.2, motorcycle from the accused. He concluded the entire proceedings by 9:30 P.M. (v) The accused further confessed before PW.12 that he would show the place where he killed his father. PW.12, along with PW8 and another followed the accused to the red gram field, situated at Mallammacheruvu at about 10:00 P.M. The accused had shown the trunk of his father in the red gram fields. PW.12 prepared a Mahazarnama under Ex.P3, at the scene of offence. It was also observed that nobody was present at the scene of offence. He posted three constables to guard the dead body. He could not trace the relatives of the deceased during night. He stayed at the scene of offence, in the night. (vi) On 06.08.2013, at about 6:00 A.M. while PW.12 was present at the scene of offence, PWs.2, 3 and others came there. He secured the presence of PW.9 and another. He placed the severed head near the trunk of the deceased for identification. PWs.2 and 3, and another, identified the dead body as that of Sreeramulu. Ex.P4 is Mahazarnama, prepared at that time. PW.12 got the entire scene photographed through PW11 and they are marked as Ex.P7. At about 9:30 A.M., he held inquest over the dead body in the presence of PW.9 and another. At the inquest, PW.12 recorded statements of PWs.1 to 3 and another. He seized the clothes of the deceased and they are marked as M.Os.8 to 10. He also seized the blood stain earth and control earth, which are marked as M.Os.12 and 13. PW.12 also prepared a rough sketch (Ex.P9), at the scene of offence. He sent the dead body for postmortem examination. (vii) PW.10 Civil Assistant Surgeon, Government Area Hospital, Kuppam, conducted autopsy over the dead body. He opined the cause of death was due to shock and haemorrhage due to severing of head and neck with a sharp-edged and lengthy weapon. PW.10 issued post- mortem report (Ex.P6). (viii) During the course of investigation on 06.08.2013, PW.12 recorded statements of PWs.4 to 6. He also sent the material objects to FSL under a letter of advice (Ex.P11). FSL report is marked as Ex.P12. (ix) On 08.08.2013, PW12 recorded statement of PW7, who conveyed panchayat between the accused and the deceased. After receiving the documents and after completing investigation, PW.12 laid charge sheet. 5. In support of its case, the prosecution examined PWs.1 to 12, marked Exs.P1 to P12 and exhibited M.Os.1 to 13. 6. When the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., he denied the incriminating evidence appearing against him. Page 9 of 12 7. Accepting the evidence of PWs 1 to 7, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the accused as foresaid. 8. Heard Sri G. Vijaya Saradhi, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Marri Venkata Ramana, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State. 9. We have carefully scrutinised the entire evidence on record. 10. The relationship between the parties is not in dispute. The deceased is none other than father of the accused. PWs.2 and 3 are none other than wife and daughter of the deceased. Admittedly, both of them were present along with the deceased in the fields on the fateful day at about 5:30 P.M. PWs.4 to 6, who were attending the coolie work in the fields of deceased, were also shown as eyewitnesses. PWs.2 and 3, in their evidence, specifically stated that at about 5:00 or 5:30 P.M., there was a quarrel between the deceased and the accused in the fields. It is also their evidence that the accused hacked the neck and severed head of the deceased. Though these witnesses were cross-examined, nothing adverse has been elicited from their evidence. 11. PWs.4 to 6, in their evidence, have categorically stated that there was a quarrel between the accused and the deceased at that relevant point of time. The evidence of PWs.4 to 6, is specific that by the time they got up, they found the accused carrying head of the deceased by holding hair. Their further evidence is that when they tried to interfere, the accused threatened them with dire consequences. Having seen gruesome attack on the deceased, PWs.2 to 6 ran away from the fields. As such, the evidence of PWs.2 to 6 is consistent with regard to the manner of attack and the accused severing head of the deceased. 12. Apart from the evidence of PWs 2 to 6, the evidence of PW1 is also relevant in the present case. PW1, in his evidence, stated that on 05.08.2013, at about 6:30 P.M., while he was at his office, the accused approached him with a plastic bag and having found blood stains on his clothes, PW1 questioned him as to why he came there. Thereafter, the accused disclosed the entire incident. Immediately, PW1 drafted a report (Ex.P1). PW1 took the accused to Police Station and handed him over to PW.12. PW.12, in his evidence, has categorically stated that the accused confessed the commission of offence, led PW.12 and mediators to the fields and showed the trunk of the deceased. As such, the trunk was recovered at the instance of the accused. 13. PW.12, in his evidence, further stated that on the night of 05.08.2013, nobody was present at the fields for recording the statements. PWs 2 and 3, in their evidence, have specifically stated that due to fear, all of them went to the hillock and stayed there the entire night. It is only on the next morning at about 6:00 A.M., as the Police were present, PWs.2, 3 and others returned to the village. At that juncture, PW12 recorded their statements. The evidence of PWs.2 to 6 is consistent, and there is nothing to disbelieve their version. 14. So far as mediation vis-à-vis property dispute is concerned, PW.7 specifically stated that there were disputes between the accused and the deceased about share in the property. Further, the evidence of PWs 2 to 6 is corroborated by the medical evidence adduced through PW10, and the evidence of PW1 also lends support to the version of PWs 2 to 6. 15. Having analysed the entire evidence carefully, we have no hesitation in concluding that the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, and as such, the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Sessions Judge needs no interference. 16. In the result, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed, confirming the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned I Additional Sessions Judge : (FAC) District and Sessions Judge, Chittoor, in S.C.No.5 of 2014, dated 03.02.2015. As the appellant was released on bail, by order, dated 20.02.2023, in I.A.No.1 of 2023, in terms of the orders passed by the composite High Court in Batchu Rangarao and others v. State of A.P.1, he is directed to surrender before the concerned, to serve the 1 2016 (3) ALT (Crl.) 505 (DB) (A.P.) remaining sentence of imprisonment, failing which, the learned trial Judge is directed to secure his presence by issuing warrants and commit him to prison for serving the remaining portion of sentence. It is needless to state that the period already undergone by the accused shall be given set off, as per the provisions of Section 428 Cr.P.C. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY _______________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Dated 19.08.2025 IKN