JUDGMENT Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J. 1. The sole accused who has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life in Sessions Case No. 47 of 2007 on the file of the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirupati is the appellant before us. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased and P.W.1 were together at the residence of the deceased on 30.03.2006, which happened to be Ugadi festival day. It appears, they had partied for a while by consuming alcohol, while P.W.1 and the deceased were taking rest, after consuming food which was also fetched from outside along with whisky, around 4.30 p.m the accused is stated to have come to the house of the deceased on a motorbike, parked it outside the house of the deceased and went inside and woke up the deceased and stabbed him causing grievous injuries on his chest and various other parts of his body and that when P.W.1 tried to intervene and rescue the deceased, the accused is also stated to have caused injuries on the right hand palm and below the wrist of the P.W.1 as well and after accomplishing this task, the accused ran away from the scene and that P.W.2 who is residing in the opposite house had seen the accused coming out of the house of the deceased and started running away in the street. It was stated that by her his clothes were all stained with blood and that he was also carrying a knife in his hand. P.W.3 is also stated to have witnessed the accused running away with blood stained clothes and knife in his hands while she was returning from a nearby vegetable shop. It is P.W.1, who took the deceased in an auto and got him admitted in SVRR Government Hospital and he also got admitted because of the bleeding injuries suffered by him. The Police went to the hospital and in less than 20 minutes of his admission, the deceased succumbed to his injuries and died. The statement made by P.W.1 was recorded by P.W.15-Sub Inspector of Police, East PS, who has registered the crime. The police have apprehended the accused based upon the lead furnished by a Councilor of Local Municipality who has been examined as P.W.9 as the accused has approached P.W.9 seeking his intervention and help in the matter. The statement made by P.W.1 was recorded by P.W.15-Sub Inspector of Police, East PS, who has registered the crime. The police have apprehended the accused based upon the lead furnished by a Councilor of Local Municipality who has been examined as P.W.9 as the accused has approached P.W.9 seeking his intervention and help in the matter. The factum that the deceased was residing in the opposite house of P.W.2 had never been doubted by the accused. P.W.2 also stated that she was standing outside her house around 4.30 p.m on the Ugadi festival day and her presence at that time is also not doubted. She has in so many words said that, she has seen the accused with blood stained clothes and a knife in his hands running in the street after emerging from the house of the deceased. She has identified the accused inside the Court hall. In fact, P.W.2 also stated that she went to the hospital to look at the deceased and she was informed that the deceased has already succumbed to injuries and died. In the given facts and circumstances, the evidence of P.W.2 is not shaken even in the least, though P.W.1 has turned hostile. Similarly, P.W.3 has categorically deposed that she is related to the deceased and she also knew the accused. She was returning from a nearby vegetable shop. When she saw the accused running on the street with blood stained clothes and with a knife in his hands and later on she has come to know that the deceased has suffered grievous injuries and hence she went to the hospital to look up the injured deceased and that she was informed that the deceased has succumbed to his injuries. Apart from P.Ws 2 & 3, P.W.5 has been examined by the prosecution who has categorically stated that he knew the accused and he also saw the deceased once before. He has also categorically stated that while he was at the railway parcel office on 30.03.2006, the accused took his motorbike on the pretext of going to his house and accordingly he gave the motorbike. But however, it is the police who came and enquired about his motorbike and then he disclosed that he lent his motorbike to the accused for going to his home and the accused has not returned the motorbike. But however, it is the police who came and enquired about his motorbike and then he disclosed that he lent his motorbike to the accused for going to his home and the accused has not returned the motorbike. When contacted, for returning the motorbike, the accused informed P.W.5 that someone or the other will bring the motorbike and deliver to him soon. But, however, P.W.5 has been taken to the house of the deceased by the police where his motorbike is parked outside. P.W.5 identified his motorbike which is seized and marked as Ex.MO.1, as he is a true owner of the said vehicle. Thus, the prosecution has established that using MO.1 motorbike belonging to P.W.5, the accused has reached the house of the deceased. After accomplishing his mission, he ran away therefrom, leaving the motorbike behind. Thus, the burden is shifted to the accused to explain the presence of MO.1 Motorbike at the house of the deceased, which he failed to discharge. Thus, when we consider the evidence of P.W. 2,3 & 5, it emerges that the presence of accused at the house of the deceased at around 4:30 P.M gets established. The prosecution has examined P.W.9, a Local Municipal Councilor whom the accused has approached seeking his help and hence he tried to find out as to what had happened. Then P.W.9 was informed by the accused of killing the deceased on 30.03.2006. Hence, P.W.9 went to the police station and informed the police as to the confession made by the accused. P.W.9 accompanied the police, came to the T.V.S. show room where the accused was waiting for P.W.9 as per the arrangement agreed upon by and between P.W.9 and the accused. It is at that place, the accused has been apprehended by the police. The accused then, took the police to his house at Raghavendra Nagar and produced the knife from his house, which has been used by him for committing the offence. P.W.12 has been examined by the prosecution to establish the recovery of the knife at the instance of the accused from his house. Though, P.W.1 has turned hostile, since P.W. 15 has deposed that, it is he who has recorded the statement made by P.W.1 in the hospital and registered the crime, the contents of Ex.P.1 cannot be discredited only on the ground that P.W.1 has turned hostile. Though, P.W.1 has turned hostile, since P.W. 15 has deposed that, it is he who has recorded the statement made by P.W.1 in the hospital and registered the crime, the contents of Ex.P.1 cannot be discredited only on the ground that P.W.1 has turned hostile. The statement which P.W.1 initially made at the hospital explained as to how injuries are caused to himself and the deceased. Otherwise, there was no real good reason for P.W.1 to have got admitted to the Government Hospital on the day of the incident. It is he who brought the deceased to the Hospital and got him admitted. It is thereafter, the deceased expired. In fact, Ex.P.11 is a Seizure Mahazar with regard to recovery of the knife which is used for committing the offence. Ex.P.13 is the post mortem report disclosing the following 14 ante mortem wounds found on the deceased. 1. Incised wound of 5x1 cm, muscle deep, over forehead, above the outer part of left eyebrow, spindle shaped with upward and inward direction with tailing in the upper part. 2. Scratch of 2x0.2 cm over left molar prominence. 3. Scratch of 2x0.2 cm over left part of chin. 4. Four incised wounds of 2x0.5 cm, subcutaneous tissue deep, each placed one below another, with 1 cm gap in between, over left side of the lowest neck, with downward, forward and inward direction. 5. Incised wound of 4x5.0 cm, subcutaneous tissue deep, over front of middle phalanx of right index and middle fingers with downward direction. 6. Scratch of 2x0.5 cm over middle of left collarbone. 7. Scratch of 4x0.5 cm, placed horizontally over front of left upper chest, 2 cm from midline. 8. Stab wound over front of upper abdomen in midline placed horizontally and left to it. It is triangle in shape, with base of 3 cm, placed to right and contused, with 6 cm of sharp edged sides, cavity deep, through which greater omentum and loops of small intestine are protruding. There is a tailing of 3 cm from apex to left. It is triangle in shape, with base of 3 cm, placed to right and contused, with 6 cm of sharp edged sides, cavity deep, through which greater omentum and loops of small intestine are protruding. There is a tailing of 3 cm from apex to left. The wound is going to backwards, downwards and to left, by making a cut of 2x2x1 cm of front lower border of liver, 2 cm left to falciform ligament, extended to the stomach, entering into it by making a cut of 1 x 1 cm, in the front wall, 4 cm left to the pyloric end, it has come out of stomach, as a cut of 1x1 cm in the lower border (greater curvature) of stomach, 2 cm left and 1 cm lower to the wound of entry of the stomach and made a cut of 1x1x1 cm of greater omentum and the near by gastro epiploiec vessels, with extravasation of blood into the surrounding omentum. The mucosa and muscular layer of stomach are cut in between the wounds of entry and exist in it. 9. Incised wound of 2x2 cm, subcutaneous tissue deep over palmar aspect of middle phalanx of left index finger. 10. Incised wound of 2x2 cm, subcutaneous tissue deep over palmar aspect of distal phalanx of left index finger with downward and backward direction. 11. Incised wound of 1x0.5 cm, skin deep of middle phalanx of left middle finger in its palmar aspect. 12. Incised wound of 2x0.5 cms subcutaneous tissue deep over distal phalanx of left ring finger in its palmar aspect, with downward direction. 13. Abraded contusion of 3x2 cm over inner part of left wrist, with upward direction. 14. Abrasion of 6x2.5 cm, placed horizontally over front of left upper arm shape. Ultimately, by the Final opinion, marked as Ex.P.15, the Professor in the Department of Forensic Medicine, S.V. Medical College, Tirupati has opined that the cause of death was due to Hypovolemic shock as a consequence of multiple wounds suffered by the deceased. In view of the above material, the contention canvassed by Sri M. Govardhan Reddy that when P.W.1 himself has turned hostile, the conviction handed down to the accused is unsustainable cannot be accepted. It is apt to notice that P.W.1 has admitted in his deposition that he was at the house of the deceased on the day of the incident. In view of the above material, the contention canvassed by Sri M. Govardhan Reddy that when P.W.1 himself has turned hostile, the conviction handed down to the accused is unsustainable cannot be accepted. It is apt to notice that P.W.1 has admitted in his deposition that he was at the house of the deceased on the day of the incident. He also admitted that they indulged in a party for a while on that day. He also admitted that, after taking food in the afternoon, both of them took rest in the same house. Therefore, it is P.W.1 who was seen in the company of the deceased when he was alive. It is P.W.1 who took the deceased, who was profusely bleeding due to the injuries inflicted upon him, to the hospital and got him admitted. Incidentally, P.W.1 also got admitted to the hospital because he has also received a serious injury on his right hand palm and near his wrist as well. Therefore, the fact that he has turned hostile has not been of great help to the accused, because all the other circumstances which have been very well connected to the incident have been held established even to a certain extent by the deposition of P.W.1 himself. It was further contended that since several witnesses have turned hostile and since no specific reason is assigned for the accused to make an extra judicial confession to P.W.9 and the fact that the statement of the accused which is stated to have been recorded by the wife of P.W.9 having not been marked and the said wife of P.W.9 having not been examined, no credibility cannot be attached to the statement of P.W.9 also fails, inasmuch, it is P.W.9 who went to the police station and he has narrated to the police as to how the offence has been committed on 30.03.2006. It will be important to notice that P.W.9 approached the police station on 25.08.2006 which is more than four months after the incident had taken place. It will be important to notice that P.W.9 approached the police station on 25.08.2006 which is more than four months after the incident had taken place. Therefore, P.W.9 could not have described as to how the incident had occurred but for the accused informing him about it, as P.W.9 is not a normal resident of the locality in which the deceased was living and he is not one of those persons who was present at the house of the deceased on the day of the incident or in its immediate aftermath. Therefore, the source of knowledge gained by P.W.9 about the incident could only be explained because of the interaction of the accused with P.W.9. But for that, P.W.9 has no other independent source of information of his own about the details of the commission of offence by the accused. This apart, it is P.W.9, who brought the police to the T.V.S showroom where, as per the earlier arrangement between the accused and P.W.9, the accused was found waiting. It is at that place, the accused was apprehended by the police. Thus, but for the P.W.9 leading the police to the T.V.S Showroom, on that particular day, the accused could not have been apprehended by the police. Therefore, the meeting between the accused and P.W.9 gains acceptability. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the offence committed by the appellant herein has been clearly held established and he has been rightly sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and we have not found any merit in this appeal for us to interfere with the judgment and sentence imposed by the learned VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirupati. Hence, this criminal appeal stands dismissed. Consequently, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall also stand dismissed.