Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 396 (AP)

Myathasi Bhaskar v. State Of A. P.

2005-04-21

BILAL NAZKI, L.NARASIMHA REDDY

body2005
L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 23-12-2002 in S. C. No. 83 of 1995, on the file of II Additional District and Sessions judge (Fast Track Court) Medak, at sanga Reddy. Initially, the charge under sections 302 read with 34 and 324 I. P. C. , was being tried against A-1 to A-4. The case against A-2, Myathari Christopher was separated, since he was absconding. Thereby myathari George, who was initially arrayed as A3, became A-2 and Myathari Bhaskar who was shown as A-4, became A-3. Myathari Bhaskar is the sole appellant in this appeal. ( 2 ) THE case of the prosecution is that the accused and the deceased, by name, garla Seeta Ramulu, brother of PW-1 and husband of PW-5, are the residents of mubarakpur Village of Medak District. Altercation is said to have been taken place between the appellant and the deceased, in the year 1993, during the eruvaka Pournima Festival, in the context of taking rounds of the bullock carts around the temple. The Dasara Festival in the subsequent year fell on 13-10-1994. It is alleged that on that day, when the deceased, pw-2 and PW-3 were returning from hanuman Temple, after puja, the appellant had a quarrel with the deceased. ( 3 ) IT was alleged that at 8. 00 p. m. , on that day, the accused came and called for the deceased from outside, to the house, when the deceased was having dinner. The deceased is stated to have came out of the house and then the appellant stabbed the deceased with the talwar in the stomach. Christopher (initially arrayed as a-2), is also alleged to have stabbed the deceased with knife, and A-1 and A-2 (as arrayed after splitting of the case), are said to have beaten the deceased with sticks. PW-3 is stated to have received injuries in the right hand finger, when he tried to intervene. ( 4 ) CRIME No. 193 of 1994, under section 302 read with 34 I. P. C. , was registered. The F. I. R. is marked as Ex. P-13. Further investigation is taken up by PW-12, the C. I. of Police, Sadasivpet. The scene of offence panchanama and the inquest over the dead body were conducted by him, under Exs. P-2 and P-3, respectively. The statements of PWs. The F. I. R. is marked as Ex. P-13. Further investigation is taken up by PW-12, the C. I. of Police, Sadasivpet. The scene of offence panchanama and the inquest over the dead body were conducted by him, under Exs. P-2 and P-3, respectively. The statements of PWs. 1 to 6 were recorded under Section 161 Cr. P. C. Post-mortem was conducted on the dead body on 14-10-1994 by PW-7, and Ex. P-4 is the post-mortem report. The appellant, along with Christopher is said to have surrendered before the court on 27-10-1994 and MO-2, talwar is stated to have been recovered on 13-11-1994, during the course of interrogation, at the instance of the appellant. PWs. 9 and 10 were the panch witnesses for the incident. Other MOs are said to have recovered under separate panchanamas, namely, Exs. P-15 and P-17. ( 5 ) THE prosecution examined PWs. l to 12 and marked Exs. P-1 to P-18. MOs. 1 to 4 were also marked. On appreciation of the evidence before it, the Trial Court acquitted A-l and A-2 and convicted the appellant herein (A-3), for the offence under section 302 I. P. C. , and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ -. In default of payment of fine, the appellant was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. ( 6 ) SRI C. Padmanabha Reddy, learned senior Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the evidence of PWs. l to 3 is not trustworthy, because of the reason that the incident is said to have taken place at 9. 00 p. m. , and there was no possibility for them to recognize the appellant and the other accused. He contends that there is enormous delay in submitting the F. I. R. , and the delay was used to meditate over the matter and to falsely implicate the appellant and the other accused. Learned senior Counsel also submits that there is discrepancy in the oral evidence, as to the nature of injuries inflicted upon the deceased, and it is not at all corroborated by the post-mortem report. ( 7 ) LEARNED Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submits that though the incident has taken place at 9. 00 p. m. , it was not at all difficult for PWs. ( 7 ) LEARNED Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submits that though the incident has taken place at 9. 00 p. m. , it was not at all difficult for PWs. 1 to 3, to recognize the accused, since all of them belonged to the same village. He further contends that the circumstances, such as, the altercation between the deceased and the appellant, just before the incident, recovery of weapon, and detection of corresponding injuries over the dead body would clinchingly establish the involvement of the appellant herein. He submits that the so-called discrepancies in the evidence are very trivial and minor in nature. ( 8 ) THE conviction of the appellant herein is based upon the eye-witness account of PWs. l to 3, the recovery of weapon used in the commission of offence, and the corroboration of the same by the other evidence, such as post-mortem report. ( 9 ) PW-1 is none other than the brother of the deceased. He stated that pws. 2 and 3 came to their house in the night of 13-10-1994 (Dasara) when himself and the deceased were present. He deposed that his brother requested PWs. 2 and 3 to have dinner along with him, and when all the four were discussing in their house, the appellant, A-l, A-2, and christopher came and called their brother, the deceased, to come out of the house. He deposed that when his brother went out of the house, the appellant stabbed him with talwar in the stomach, Christopher is stated to have stabbed the deceased with knife, and A-1 and A-2 beat the deceased with sticks and that the deceased died on the spot. He has also spoken to an incident, which resulted in altercation, between the deceased and the appellant, in relation to taking out the procession of double carts. He said that the complaint was submitted on the next day at Sadasivpet. In the cross-examination, he stated that he has seen the appellant removing talwar from the stomach of the deceased, after stabbing. He has also stated the size of the talwar. As to the delay in submitting the complaint, he stated that the wife of the deceased went to her parents house, during the festival, and he alone was there to handle the matter. He has also stated the size of the talwar. As to the delay in submitting the complaint, he stated that the wife of the deceased went to her parents house, during the festival, and he alone was there to handle the matter. A suggestion was made to him in the cross-examination that the house of the appellant was burnt immediately after the incident. He denied the suggestion that he did not witness the incident, due to darkness. Nothing substantial was elicited through him, to discredit his version, ( 10 ) PW-2 is another eye-witness. He stated that he went to the house of the deceased on Dasara i. e. on 13-10-1994, and by that time, PWs. 1 and 3 were also present. The deceased said to have requested him and PW-3, to have dinner with him. When the deceased, himself and PWs. l and 3 were discussing, the appellant, A-l and A-2 and christopher have came there and called the deceased to come out of the house. After the deceased went out of his house, pw-2 is said to have heard the cries "amma" and instantly, he also went out of the house, and that he witnessed Christopher stabbing the deceased with knife and the appellant had just stabbed the deceased with talwar. The deceased is said to have fell down, A-l and A-2 beat the deceased with sticks, and thereafter all the four ran away. He further deposed that PW-3 tried to intervene, and in the process, received injuries to his hand. Accordingly to PW-2, on the day of incident, at around 8:00 p. m. , himself, the deceased and PW-3 were returning from Hanuman Temple after the jammi Pooja, and on the way, there was exchange of words between the appellant and the deceased. The deceased is said to have beat the appellant. Similar suggestion as were put to PW-1, were repeated to this witness also, in the cross examination, and nothing substantial was elicited through him. ( 11 ) THE evidence of PW-3 is almost identical to that of PW-2. In the cross examination, he has categorically stated that he has seen the appellant as well as christopher stabbing the deceased. It was suggested to him that he did not receive any injury in that night. PW-4 is another witness, who is said to have witnessed the incident. Though his presence was stated by PW-1, PWs. In the cross examination, he has categorically stated that he has seen the appellant as well as christopher stabbing the deceased. It was suggested to him that he did not receive any injury in that night. PW-4 is another witness, who is said to have witnessed the incident. Though his presence was stated by PW-1, PWs. 2 and 3 did not speak about it. Hence, it is not at all safe to rely upon the evidence of PW-4. PW-5, is the wife of the deceased, and since she is not an eyewitness, her evidence is not going to be of any importance in the matter. PWs. 6 and 8 are witnesses in panchanama, and PWs. 9 and 10 are witnesses for the surrender of the accused. Out of them, PW-10 turned hostile. PW-7 is the Deputy Civil Surgeon and R. M. O. , District Headquarters hospital, who conducted the post-mortem. He has noticed external as well as internal injuries over the dead body. Prominent among them are:"external injuries: 1. Ellipicital shape cut injury of 4 x 1/2 cm. with sharp edge at the lower left border of costal margin front of the chest with depth of 6 cms. 2. Ellipicital shape cut injury on right upper abdomen and the lower part of the right front of costal margin of 4 x 1/2 cm. with sharp edges of depth of 8 cms. in the line of mid-clavicular line. 3. A sphere shape injury with same measurements just 6 cms. above the no. 3 injury in the 5th intercostals space of front of chest with depth of 6 cms. 4. Another same ellipitical cut injury of 4 x l/2 cm on left back of chest 4 cms below the scapular with a depth of 8 cms. at the level of 6 intercostal space. 5. An cut injury of 4 x 1/2 cms on left side of neck of depth 1 1/2 cms on depth. Infernal injuries: 1. Pearced and teared at the level of injury No. 3 of depth 51/2 cms of right plural cavity. 2. Left plural cavity peared and teared at the level of Injury No. 4 with depth of 71/2 cms. 3. Both plural cavities contain 500 ml. of blood each. 4. Lungs both lungs teared with bleeding at the sights of Injuries No. 3 and 4. 5. 2. Left plural cavity peared and teared at the level of Injury No. 4 with depth of 71/2 cms. 3. Both plural cavities contain 500 ml. of blood each. 4. Lungs both lungs teared with bleeding at the sights of Injuries No. 3 and 4. 5. Left Jugular wing show cut with exposure of human outside at the side of Injury No. 5. 6. Abdominal cavity contains of 1000 cc of blood". ( 12 ) ACCORDING to him, the death was caused due to bleeding and shock, due to multiple injuries to vital organs. It was elicited through him, in the cross- examination, that all the injuries are caused through a sharp-edged weapon. ( 13 ) THE discrepancies pointed out in the evidence are that, while PW-1 stated that the appellant stabbed the deceased in the abdomen, PW-2 stated that the stabbing was at the chest, and according to PW-3, the appellant stabbed the deceased in the neck. In this context, it needs to be noted that there are stab injuries in all the three places, referred to above, and in other places. All the three witnesses came out of the house. They came almost one after the other, and all of them have spoken with one voice, that the appellant inflicted stab injuries with MO-2. While, by the time, one witness came out, that the appellant was said to have removing the talwar, after stabbing; he was stated to have been inflicting further injuries, by the time the other witnesses came. Even assuming that there are any discrepancies, they are too trivial and minor in nature. The post-mortem report, Ex. P-4 and the evidence of PW-7, support the version of PWs-1 to 3. The contention that it was not possible for PWs. l to 3, to recognize the accused at 9. 00 p. m. , in the night; cannot be accepted, for the reason that it was not suggested that the darkness was so acute, that it is impossible to recognize the presence of persons, that too those who are acquainted with. Further, all the accused and the witnesses are from the same place, and hardly one hour befpre the incident, PWs. 2 and 3 have witnessed an altercation between the appellant and the deceased. Further, all the accused and the witnesses are from the same place, and hardly one hour befpre the incident, PWs. 2 and 3 have witnessed an altercation between the appellant and the deceased. It is on behalf of the defence, that a suggestion was put to PW-1, that the house of the appellant was burnt soon after the incident, as a measure of retaliation. Therefore, this Court does not find any ground or basis to interfere with the finding of the trial Court, as to the guilt of the appellant. ( 14 ) IT is true that there is delay in submitting the F. I. R. The incident has taken place at 9. 00 p. m; whereas the F. I. R. was submitted between 10. 00 and 11. 00 a. m. on the next day. In this regard, it needs to be noted that the incident has taken place at a remote place, about 12 KMs away from the Police Station. The deceased was killed at 9. 00 p. m. PW-1 alone was the inmate of the house. The wife of the deceased was not in the village. It is difficult to expect pw-1 to leave the dead body unattended to, and to go over to the Police Station, even that night. When the delay is explained properly, it does not become fatal to an otherwise consistent case. ( 15 ) UNDER these circumstances, it cannot be said that the delay was either undue, or was used to meditate upon, to implicate the accused. Hence, this Court does not find any ground to interfere with the conviction and sentence awarded by the trial Court against the appellant. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.