Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 935 (AP)

Palaparti Jagannayakulu v. State Of A. P.

2000-12-15

body2000
RAMESH MADHAV BAPAT, J. ( 1 ) THE sole accused in Sessions Case No. 128 of 1998, which was decided by the Learned iii Additional Sessions Judge, Kakinada, is the appellant herein. The accused-appellant was tried for an offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for causing the murder of (1) his mother, subbayyamma (D1), (2) his brother satyanarayana (D2) and (3) his sister-in- law Parvathi (D3) by hacking them with a knife on 8-12-1997 at 3. 00 a. m. , at A. K. Mallavaram village. On evidence, the learned Judge found the accused-appellant guilty and, therefore, sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of rs. 10,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for six months. ( 2 ) THE prosecution story can be briefly narrated as follows : PW3 was the mother- in-law of Satyanarayana (D2 ). Her daughter parvathi (D3) was given in marriage to satyanarayana (D2 ). The accused was the elder brother of Satyanarayana (D2 ). The accused along with his wife and children were staying in a portion of a house, whereas D2 was staying in another portion of the house along with his wife and mother. There were disputes between the accused on one hand and his brother D2 and subbayamma (D1) on the other hand. Both filed suits against each other. PW9 happened to be an Advocate appearing for the deceased in those civil suits and he spoke about the civil litigation between the parties. ( 3 ) PW1 happened to be a VAO, at a. K. Mallavaram. PW2 was the village servant. According to PW1, on 8-12-1997 at about 5. 00 a. m. , the accused came to his house in his hand and informed him that in the afternoon of the previous day, there was a dispute between himself and his brother satyanarayana (D2) and the accused also confessed about the killing of all the three deceased. At the time of this confession, pw2 was also there with him. According to pw1, he recorded the statement of the accused, which was signed by the accused. PWs. 1 and 2 also signed as attestors. Ex. P1 is the statement recorded by PW1. PWs. 1 and 2 took the accused to Gollaprolu Police station. PW14, Inspector of Police, received the statement, Ex. P1, along with the report of the VAO, which is marked as ex. PWs. 1 and 2 also signed as attestors. Ex. P1 is the statement recorded by PW1. PWs. 1 and 2 took the accused to Gollaprolu Police station. PW14, Inspector of Police, received the statement, Ex. P1, along with the report of the VAO, which is marked as ex. P2. PW14, on the strength of Ex. P1, registered the case in Crime No. 131/1997 against the accused-appellant under section 302 IPC, and issued copies of the fir, to all the concerned. ( 4 ) PW14 examined PW1 and seized mo4-knife and MO5-half pant in the presence of PW10 under mediator s report, which is marked as Ex. P15. Thereafter, pw14 visited the scene of offence along with PWs. 1 and 4. He prepared an observation report, Ex. P3 and rough sketch, ex. P24. He got the scene of offence photographed with the help of PW7 in the presence of PWs. 1 and 11. PW14 conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased. thereafter, the dead bodies were sent to the Government Hospital, pithapuram, with a requisition for postmorterm examination. PW13 happened to be the finger print expert. He visited the scene of offence and noticed that there were chance fingerprints on the wall of the house. The accused was arrested on 8-12-1997. ( 5 ) PW8, Civil Assistant Surgeon, government Hospital, Pithapuram, conducted autopsy over the dead body of d2 on 9-12-1997 and issued Ex. P14, postmortem certificate. According to him, to cause of death was due to carnio cerebral and spinal injuries. On 8-12-1997, PW15, woman Assistant Surgeon, Government hospital, Pithapuram, conducted autopsy over the dead body of D1 and D3. Exs. P30 and P31 are the post-morterm certificates of D1 and D3 respectively. ( 6 ) ON 8-12-1997 PW13 took one fingerprint from the wall and two prints from the handle of knife at the Police Station. On 10-12-1997 PW14 took fingerprints of the accused in the Court and sent them to PW13 which were received by him on 16-12-1997. Out of the three prints, one chance print found on the wall, which was marked as "a", was found to be identical with the left thumb impression of the accused. The other prints were unfit for comparison. Ex. P16 is the report given by the fingerprint expert, PW13. Ex. P17 is the chart. After completion of investigation, pw14 filed charge-sheet. Out of the three prints, one chance print found on the wall, which was marked as "a", was found to be identical with the left thumb impression of the accused. The other prints were unfit for comparison. Ex. P16 is the report given by the fingerprint expert, PW13. Ex. P17 is the chart. After completion of investigation, pw14 filed charge-sheet. ( 7 ) THE defence of the accused was of total denial. ( 8 ) IN support of its case, the prosecution led the evidence of PWs. 1 to 15. It also produced certain documents, which were marked as Exs. P1 to P30. Exs. Xl to X12 were also marked to show the previous litigation between the parties. The defence marked contradictions Exs. D1 tod5. ( 9 ) OUT of the witnesses examined by the prosecution, PWs. 4 to 6 did not support its case. ( 10 ) IN order to prove that the deceased d1 to D3 died homicidal death, prosecution wants to rely upon the evidence of pw14 and also on the evidence of pw11, who had attested the inquest panchanamas Exs. P4 to P6. After the inquest panchanamas were over, all the three dead bodies were sent for post-mortem examination. PW 8 was the Doctor who conducted autopsy over the dead body of d2 and he noticed the following external injuries. "1. A cut injury 6 x 1/2 x 2" horizontally over the right side of the head cutting the right ear in the middle, cutting open the underlying bones, extending from the lat. angle of the right eye to the occipital region of the scalp behind the right ear. 2. An incised wound 5 x i 1/2" bone deep vertically placed on the right scapular region. 3. A cut injury 4 x 3/4 x2" at the back and right lat. Aspect of the neck at the lower part obliquely placed extending to the midline at the back severing underlying blood vessels, vertebra and spinal cord with blood clots. " ( 11 ) ON internal examination, the Doctor noticed the following injuries : "skull injury as described in injury no. 1 brain matter is pale, blood clots in the base of the skull with cerebral laceration in lower parts. Hyoid bone is intact. No fracture of the ribs. Lungs are pale. Heart is empty. All the abdominal viscera are in their normal position. Stomach contains 50 ml. 1 brain matter is pale, blood clots in the base of the skull with cerebral laceration in lower parts. Hyoid bone is intact. No fracture of the ribs. Lungs are pale. Heart is empty. All the abdominal viscera are in their normal position. Stomach contains 50 ml. of digested food material. Liver, spleen and kidneys are pale. Spinal column is injured at the level of 6th cervical vertebra with severing of neck muscles, blood vessels, and spinal cord. " ( 12 ) THE Doctor opined that the injuries Nos. 1 and 3 were fatal and death would be instantaneous. As per his observation, he issued post-mortem certificate, Ex. P14. ( 13 ) PW15, Woman Assistant Surgeon, government Hospital, Pithapuram, conducted post-mortem examination of D1 and D3. On external examination of D1, she noticed the following injuries. "1. A transversely situated cut injury of 6 x 5 x 3" on the left side of face, extending to the left side neck, mandible and great vessels of the neck were found cut. 2. A transversely situated cut and penetrative injury of 8 x 5 x 3" extending from the left side of the face just below the injury No. 1 to the middle of the occipital region of the head. Mandible (upper jaw) tubule of the left ear, temporal and occipital bones were cut and brain matters injured and came out. Both the injuries are fatal and death could be instantaneous. " ( 14 ) ON internal examination of D1, she noticed the following internal injuries : "no fracture of ribs. Hyoid bone intact. Organs of abdomen and thorax are pale. Stomach contains 2 to 3 oz. , of digested food matter. No fracture of pelvis. No fracture of spinal column. " ( 15 ) THE Doctor opined that all the injuries were ante-mortem in nature and could have been caused by a sharp heavy cutting weapon. She opined that the deceased would appear to have died of haemorrhage and shock due to carnio cerebral injury and injury to great vessels of neck. As per her observation, she issued post-mortem certificate, Ex. P30. ( 16 ) PW15 found the following external injuries on examination of D3. "there is no fracture of ribs. No fracture of hyoid bone. Internal organs of Thorax and abdomen are pale. No fracture of pelvis. Cervical spinal cord cut as mentioned in the external injury. As per her observation, she issued post-mortem certificate, Ex. P30. ( 16 ) PW15 found the following external injuries on examination of D3. "there is no fracture of ribs. No fracture of hyoid bone. Internal organs of Thorax and abdomen are pale. No fracture of pelvis. Cervical spinal cord cut as mentioned in the external injury. 28 weeks old dead fetus female present in the uterine cavity. Skull bones no- fracture. " ( 17 ) SHE noticed the following external injuries on external examination of D3. "1. A cut injury of 5 x 4 x 5" on the back of the neck. Cervical spine was cut. it is a fatal injury and death could be instantaneous. 2. A cut injury of transversely situated 4 x 3 x 1" on the back of the chest between two shoulders. 3. A cut injury of 4 x 4 x3" just below the injury No. 24. A cut injury of 8 x 6 x 4" on the left shoulder blade. 5. A cut injury of 6 x3 x2" on the right shoulder. 6. A cut injury of 6 x 5 x 4" on the left axilla. 7. An abrasion of 5 x 2" on the left side of face. 8. A cut injury of 2 x1 x1/2" on the left upper arm. " ( 18 ) THE Doctor opined that the injuries were ante-mortem in nature and could be caused by a weapon like MO4. She also opined that the deceased would appear to have died of haemorrhage and shock due to spinal cord injury. As per her observation, she issued post-mortem certificate, Ex. P31. ( 19 ) CONSIDERING the evidence led by the prosecution on the point of homicidal death of the deceased, we hold that all the three deceased did die homicidal death. ( 20 ) IN order to connect the deceased with the crime, the prosecution mainly relies upon the evidence of PWs. 1 and 2. PW1 happened to be the Village Administrative officer. After committing the murder, the accused alleged to have gone to the house of PW1 at 5. 00 a. m. , and confessed before him of having committed three murders. He also carried a knife along with him by which he had committed the murder of the deceased. PW1, VAO, recorded the statement of the accused, which is now produced on record at Ex. 00 a. m. , and confessed before him of having committed three murders. He also carried a knife along with him by which he had committed the murder of the deceased. PW1, VAO, recorded the statement of the accused, which is now produced on record at Ex. P1 in which the accused confessed to have murdered three persons. Ex. P1 was signed by the accused. Thereafter PW1 prepared his own report, which is now produced on record at ex. P2. The contents of Ex. P2 show that the accused went to the house of PW1 along with the knife and alleged to have confessed before him of having committed the murder of three persons. Ex. P1, which was the signed statement of the accused, was attested by PWs. 1 and 2. Thereafter, PW1 gave a ring to C. I. of Police and on the advice of the C. I. , the accused was taken to the police Station and PW1 submitted Exs. P1 and P2, on the strength of which the offence was registered and further investigation started. ( 21 ) WE have one more piece of evidence, which will Conclusively establish that the accused was responsible for causing the death of the deceased. The evidence of PW13, the fingerprint expert, shows that he had taken in all three chance fingerprints. One fingerprint was found on the wall of the house and two finger prints on the knife, which was produced by the accused. Thereafter, the investigating Officer, PW14, took the finger prints of the accused in the presence of the magistrate and they were sent to PW13 for comparison with chance finger prints. The evidence of PW13 conclusively shows that the chance fingerprints tallied with the finger prints of the accused which were taken in the Court. PW13 filed a report as per his observation. The report is marked as ex. P1 6 and the chart prepared by him is marked as Ex. P17. ( 22 ) CONSIDERING the entire evidence, which inspires confidence, we have no hesitation in holding that the accused was responsible for committing the murder of d1 to D3 and, therefore, we do not find any reasons to interfere with the order of conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Sessions Judge against the accused. Hence, we dismiss the appeal. ( 22 ) CONSIDERING the entire evidence, which inspires confidence, we have no hesitation in holding that the accused was responsible for committing the murder of d1 to D3 and, therefore, we do not find any reasons to interfere with the order of conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Sessions Judge against the accused. Hence, we dismiss the appeal. ( 23 ) BEFORE we part with the appeal, we would like to bring to the notice of the learned Sessions Judge that though there were three murders, he framed a single charge of having committed the murder of three persons. That is, in fact, not permissible in law. The learned Sessions Judge ought to have framed three different charges against the accused for having committed the murder of three different charges. The attention of the learned Sessions Judge is invited to the provisions contained in section 218 of the Code of Criminal procedure, which provides for framing of charges for distinct offences. When three distinct murders have been committed, the learned Sessions Judge ought to have framed three different charges. Of course, in the present case, in reality, no injustice is caused to the accused and, therefore, we are not inclined to remand the case for re-trial. Since we have confirmed the order of conviction and sentence, the entire exercise would be unnecessary. ( 24 ) WHILE awarding the sentence, the learned Sessions Judge ought to have awarded sentence on each count. That has also not been done in the present case. We, therefore, convict the accused for imprisonment for life on each of the three counts and make the sentences run concurrently. On each count, we sentence the accused-appellant to suffer imprisonment for life and the sentences are ordered to run concurrently. The sentence of fine of rs. 10,000/- imposed on the accused- appellant by the learned Sessions Judge is set aside. ( 25 ) REGISTRY is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the III Additional sessions Judge, Kakinada, as well as to the officer, by name, who rendered the judgment under appeal, wherever he is posted.