APHC010910462017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH irs; AT AMARAVATI MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CRIMINAL APPEAL No.259 of 2018 Appeal under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C, aganist the conviction judgment passed by the court of the XII Additional District and Sessions Judge cum- VI Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Vijayawada in SC.No.217 of 2015 dated 20-07-2017. Between: Mr.Mohammed Yunus Basha @ Chippa, S/o.Ali, Muslim, Occ: Driver, D.No.19-15, Jendachettu Centre, Old RR Pet, Vijayawada. Auto ...APPELLANT/ACCUSED AND The State of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court ...RESPONDENT 7 / Counsel for the Appellant » ; DR CHALLA SRINIVASA REDDY / / / Counsel for the Respondent : SRI PANINI SOMAYAJI ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR -v" The Court made the following : r APHC010910462017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3547] MONDAY, THE FOURTH 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: 259/2018 Between: MR.MOHAMMED YUNUS BASHA @ CHIPPA, S/0 ALI, AGED 29 YEARS, MUSLIM, OCC ; AUTO DRIVER, D.NO.19-15, JENDACHETTU CENTRE, OLD RR PET, VIJAYAWADA. ...APELLANT AND THE STATE OF AP, rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad. / ...RESPODENT Counsel for the Appellant; 1 .Dr CHALLA SRINIVASA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 2 Crl.A.No.259 of 2018 The Court made the following: JUDGMENT : (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.Suresh Reddy) Sole accused in Sessions Case No.217 of 2015 on the file of the Court of XII Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-VI Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Vijayawada, is the appellant. He was tried and convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge under Section 302 I PC. Substance of the charge is that prior to 01.05.2015 at about 11.00 P.M. the accused beat one Khadar Vali (hereinafter referred to as ‘the deceased’) with a stout wooden log on his right side head near ramp of old Rajeswaripeta, Vijayawada and while undergoing treatment, the deceased succumbed to injuries on 09.05.2015, thereby committed an offence punishable under Section. 302 IPC. 2. After completion of trial, learned Additional Sessions Judge, convicted the accused under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for ‘LIFE’ and also to pay fine of Rs.5000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of three (03) months. Aggrieved by the same, the accused/appellant filed the present appeal. 3. 4. Case of prosecution, as emanated from the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, is as follows:- (i) The accused and the material prosecution witnesses are residents of Vijayawada. Vijayawada. The accused and the deceased were eking out their livelihood by plying Auto-rickshaws. P.W.1 is none other than the younger brother of the deceased. While so, on 01.05.2015 at about 11.00 P.M., P.Ws.2, 3 and another brought the deceased, who was in an unconscious state to the house of P.W.1. P.W.1 was under the The deceased was also resident of 3 Crl.A.No.259 of 2018 impression that because of the consumption of alcohol, the injured was in an unconscious state. As he could not regain consciousness even on 02.05.2015, he summoned R.M.P doctor, who in turn advised P.W.1 to take him to the hospital. Accordingly, on 02.05.2015, P.W.1 took the injured to Government Hospital, Vijayawada at about 6.00 P.M. about 6.05 P.M. P.W,9-Head Constable attached At to the Out-post police station. Government General Hospital, Vijayawada received intimation- Ex.P5 from the hospital. Immediately, he went to the hospital and He sent both Exs.P1 and recoded the statement-Ex.P1 from P.W.1. P.5 to II Town Police station on the point of jurisdiction. At about 7.30 P.M., P.W.10-A.S.I, Kothapeta Police Station received-Exs.P1 and P5 FIR is marked as and registered a case in Crime No.144 of 2015. Ex.P6. He sent copies of FIRs to all the house of P.W.1, concerned. He visited the who informed him that P.Ws.2, 3 and one Simhachalam brought the injured on 01.05.2015 at about 11.00 P.M. Then, P.W.10 asked P.W.1 to produce P.Ws.2, 3 and Simhachalam before him. They showed M.O.I-wooden log. He examined P.WsI to 3, P.W.5 and others and recorded their statements. He prepared an observation report-Ex.P2 in the presence of P.W.6. He also prepared rough sketch-Ex.P7 at the scene of offence. He returned to the police station and altered the section of law from Section 324 to Section 307 IPC. Ex.P8 is the altered Memo. On 04.05.2015, P.W.11-S.I. of police took up further investigation from P.W.10. offence and verified the investigation conducted by P.W.10 and found it on correct lines. He visited the scene of As the statements of witnesses were already recorded by P.W.10, he did not once again record their statements. On 07.05.2015 on credible information, he arrested the accused at about 11.00 A.M. at Sitara centre and produced him before the Magistrate, who remanded him to judicial custody. learned 4 Crl.A.No.259 of 2018 (ii) While undergoing treatment, the deceased succumbed to injuries on 09.05.2015 at about 2.30 P.M. Immediately, P.W.10 handed over the investigation to the Inspector of Police-P.W.12. At about 7.00 P.M. on 09.05.2015 P.W.12 received death intimation-Ex.P9 from the hospital. On the basis of Ex.P9, he altered the Section of law from Section 307 to Section 302 IPC. Ex.PIO is the altered Memo. He verified the investigation conducted by P.Ws.10 and 11 and found it on correct lines. On 10.05.2015 he visited the Government Hospital and held inquest over the dead body in the presence of P.W.7 and another. Inquest report is marked Ex.P3. During inquest, he recorded statements of P.Ws.1,2, 4 and others. He sent the dead body for post mortem examination. ^ : (iii) P.W.8-Professor, Forensic Medicine, Siddartha Medical College, Vijayawada conducted autopsy over the dead body. He opined the cause of death was due to “head injury and its complications”, issued post-mortem certificate-Ex.P4. He (iv) On 24.05.2015 P.W.12 sent M.0.1 to Forensic Science Laboratory for chemical analysis under a letter of advice-Ex.P11. F.S.L report is marked as Ex.P12. After receiving all the documents and after completing investigation, P.W.12 filed charge sheet. 5. In support of its case, prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 12, marked Exs.P1 to PI2 and exhibited M.0.1. 6. When the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., he denied the incriminating evidence found against him. On behalf of defence, portion of Section 161 Cr.P.C. statements of P.Ws.1 and 2 were marked as Exs.DI and D.2. i ' !i ' 5 Crl.A.No.259 of 2018 7. Accepting the evidence of P.Ws.2, 3 and 5, the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the accused as aforesaid. 8. Heard Dr.Challa Srinivasa Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri.C.Panini Somayaji, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State. 9. We have carefully perused the entire evidence on record. 10. Admittedly, P.W.1-younger brother of deceased is not an eye witness to the incident and he was at home at the relevant point of time. It is the evidence of P.W.1 that at about 11.00 P.M. 01.05.2015 P.Ws.2, 3 and one Simhachalam brought the deceased to his house. According to P.W.1, he was under the impression that because of the consumption of alcohol, his brother on was in an unconscious state. As such, he could not take him to the hospital. According to the evidence of P.W.1, on 02.05.2015 as the deceased could not regain consciousness, he took him to Government Hospital, Vijayawada where the doctors treated him. Except to that extent, the evidence of P.W.1 is not at all helpful in establishing the attack made by the accused. His evidence further shows that he came to know through P.Ws.2, 3 and one Simhachalam about the accused beating the deceased. According to the prosecution, P.Ws.2, 3 and P.W.5 are the witnesses to the alleged attack. All these witnesses in their evidence have categorically stated that at the relevant point of time, there was a 11. eye quarrel between the accused and the deceased near the ramp of Rajeswaripeta i.e., Auto stand. It is their further evidence that the accused and the deceased raised their voice. During the course of altercation, the accused took out M.0.1 from one of the Auto-rickshaws 6 Crl.A.No.259 of 2018 and gave one blow on the right side head of the deceased and went away. It is the evidence of P.Ws.2, 3 and 5 that immediately, the injured was shifted to the house of P.W.1 at about 11.00 P.M. So far as P.W.4 is concerned, she is none other than the wife of the deceased and she stated in her evidence that on 02.05.2015 at about 8.30 A.M., P.W.1 telephoned her and informed about the incident. So far as P.Ws.6 and 7 are concerned, they are panch witnesses for the observation report and inquest report. P.W.8 is the Doctor, who conducted autopsy over the dead body. P.Ws.9 to 12 are the police officers who investigated into the crime. Having analyzed the entire evidence on record, we observe that the prosecution projected P.Ws.2, 3 and 5 as eye witnesses. All these three witnesses categorically stated that the accused beat the deceased with M.0.1 on his right side of the head and went away. P.Ws.2, 3 and 5 in their evidence further stated that both the accused and the deceased were quarreling with each other. As such, the incident is preceded by a quarrel between both of them. Further, the medical evidence adduced through P.W8 coupled with Ex.P4 post mortem certificate clearly show that the cause of death was due to “head injury and its complications”. As such, in the considered opinion of this Court that the “head injury” may not be the direct cause of the death and its complications may be precipitating factor for causing death. Admittedly, even according to P.Ws.2, 3 and 5, the accused was not armed with any weapon at the relevant point of time. During the course of altercation, the accused took out M.0.1 from one of the Auto-rickshaw and gave one blow on the right side head of the deceased and went away. In such circumstances, it cannot, by any stretch of imagination, be said that the accused was having intention to 12. 7 Crl.A.No.259 of 2018 kill the deceased, deceased, he would have inflicted allow circumstances, we are inclined ,o w present Criminal Appeal In part by setting aside the and sentence for the offence under Section 302 iPC, instead the ccused ,s found guilty for the offence under Section 304 Part-ll IPC If really, he has got any intention to kill few more blows on the deceased. the 13. conviction 14. In the result, the Criminal Appeal conviction is allowed in part by setting recorded aside the and sentence against the XII Additional District and Sessions appellant/accused by the learned Judge-cum-VI Additional Metropolitan S.C.No.217 of 2015 Sessions Judge, Vijayawada iin dated 20.07.2017 under Section 302 IPC appellant/accused is found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part-ll IPC and ho ■ , . " he IS convicted and sentenced to the period already undergone served more than Instead, the by him, as he has already seven (07) years of imprisonment as asserted by the learned counsel for the appellant, while maintaining the fine amount. 05 08 2024 h ■ a bail by order, dated 05.08.2024, he is directed to surrender before Central Prison, Rajamahendra As the appellant/accused the Superintendent, varam, and complete the formalities enunciated in Batchu Rangarao and as per the guidelines I The State of Andhra others \/s of 2016 in Pradesh (Crl.A.M.P.No.1687 Crl.A.No.607 of 2011). His bail bonds shall stand cancelled, petitions, Jf^ny, pending shall SD/- S.V.S.R.A/IURTHY JOINT REGISTRAR Consequently, miscellaneous stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To f- The XII Additional r Metropolitan Sessions records if any) District and Sessions ‘ Judge, Vijayawada Judge-cum-VI Additional Krishna District, (with 2. The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Rajamahendravaram Godavari District. 4. The Station House officer, II Town Police Station, Vijayawada City, Krishna District. 5. Mr.Mohammed Yunus Basha @ Chippa, S/o.Ali, Muslim, Occ; Auto Driver, D.No.19-15, Jendachettu Centre, Old RR Pet, Vijayawada. (By Rpad) 6. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi[OUT] 7. One CC to Dr Challa Srinivasa Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 8. The Section Officer, Criminal Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi. (to dispatch the trial court records) 9. Two CD Copies East TK TAC H(gh court dated:04/08/2025 JUDGMENT CRLANo.259 of 2018 a 0 2 SEP 2025 )S ALLOWING THE criminal appeal in part