1 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022
IN THE COURT OF II-ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
HANUMAKONDA.
Friday, this the 7th day of February, 2025
PRESENT: Ch. Ramesh Babu,
Principal Sessions Judge,
Hanumakonda
FAC.II-Addl. Sessions Judge, Hanumakonda.
SESSIONS CASE NO. 283 OF 2022
(PRC No.412 of 2019 on the file of II-Addl. Judicial Magistrate of
First Class, Warangal in Crime No.124 of 2019 of Police Station,
Dharmasagar).
1.Name and description of the: The State of Telangana through complainantthe Inspector of Police, PS. Dhar- masagar.
2.Name and description of theAlakunta Raju, S/o Salaiah, Age: accused :35 years, Caste: Waddera, Occ: Coolie, R/o Narayanagiri Village.
3.Prosecution conducted by: Additional Public Prosecutor.
4.Accused defended by: Sri D.Srikanth, Legal Aid counsel.
5.Offences charged: Offence punishable under Section Sections 302 of Indian Penal Code.
6.Plea of the accused: Pleaded guilty and claimed that he has no intention to kill his wife and claimed to be tried.
7.Finding of the Court: Found guilty for the offence u/Sec.304-part II of I.P.C
8.Sentence or Order: Accused is sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 8 (eight years) for the offence u/Sec.304-part II and remand period if any shall be set off.
2 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022
This Sessions Case is coming before me on 06.02.2025 for final hearing in the presence of Sri.G.Ravidner Rao, Additional Public Prosecutorfor the State/complainant and ofSri D.Srikanth, Legal Aid Counselfor the Accused upon perusing the material papers on record, upon hearing arguments and having stood over for consideration to this day this Court made the following:
:: J U D G M E N T ::
1. The Inspector of Police, P.S.Dharmasagar filed charge in
Cr.No.124/2019 of P.S. Dharmasagar alleging that on 07.08.2019
PW.1 came to the Police Station, Dharmasagar and lodged a complaint stating that he had two sons and two daughters and he has performed the marriage of his younger daughter about 17 years back with the accused and they blessed with one son and two daughters and the accused addicted to consumption of alcohol and used to beat his wife and the accused while he was staying at
Hyderabad, he beat the deceased, on that PW1 went to Hyderabad brought his daughter to his home. After 15 days, the accused came to him and admitted his guilt and took her daughter to Vemulawada and he also mentioned that they have returned from Vemulawada on 06.08.2019. On 07.08.2019 at about 5 p.m., his grand son came to him and informed that the deceased was found in a pool of blood in their house. Immediately, PW.1 visited the house and found the dead body of the deceased in a pool of blood.
3 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022
2.On receipt of the complaint from PW1, PW15 registered the case in Crime No.124/2019 for the offence punishable u/Sec.302 of
I.P.C and PW.15 conducted inquest and also got conducted postmortem examination and also inspected the scene of offence and got summoned clues team where collected the blood stains found in the scene of offence.
3. The Inspector of Police further averred in the charge sheet that on 26.08.2019, the police apprehended the accused and he was brought to the Police Station on that he secured the presence of
PW.11 and LW.16-Mekala Sudhakar and recorded the confession statement of the accused and after collecting postmortem examination report and FSL Report, he filed charge sheet.
4.The learned II-Addl. Judicial First Class Magistrate at
Warangal registered the case as PRC.No.412/2019 and committed the case to the Court of Sessions vide its Committal Order dated 27.12.2019.
5.The learned District and Sessions Judge, Warangal registered the case as S.C.No.02/2020 and made over to VII-Addl.Sessions
Judge, Warangal. In view of bifurcation of judicial districts, the
Sessions Judge, Hanumakonda received the file and renumbered as
4 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022
S.C.No.283/2022 and made over to II-Addl.Sessions Judge,
Hanumakonda.
6.On 12.03.2023, this Court framed the charge u/Sec.302 of
I.P.C and contents of charge was explained to him, he stated that the dispute took place between the accused and his wife, for which he got anger and beat the deceased on her head with a stick and he has no intention to kill her and sought for conducting trial.
7. In proof of the case of the prosecution, P.W.1 to P.W.15 were examined and Exs.P-1 to P-16 and MO.1 and MO.2 were marked.
8.The incriminating evidence against the accused was put to him u/Sec.313 Cr.P.C and he denied the same.
9. Heard arguments of both parties. Perused the material on record.
10.Now the point for consideration is: Whether the prosecution proved the case against the accused for the charge levelled against him for the offence punishable under section 302 of I.P.C beyond reasonable doubt?
11.The case of the prosecution that the accused addicted to drinking alcohol and he used to raise quarrels with his wife and used 5 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022 to beat her. As a sequel on 07.08.2019, the accused beat the deceased on her head with a stick as a result, she died.
12.In proof of the case of the prosecution, PW1 stated in his evidence that the deceased/A.Gattamma is his daughter and the accused was husband of deceased and that deceased/A.Gattamma marriage was solemnized with the accused after the marriage, the accused lead marital life with the deceased for a period of one year and thereafter shifted the family to Hyderabad and stayed there amicably for a period of 4 to 5 years. Later, the accused addicted to alcohol and used to harass the deceased and used to beat her and demanded her to provide money and the same was intimated to
PW1 and upon which, he questioned the accused and advised the accused to live amicably but the accused denied the same. As such, they lodged the complaint in Lalaguda Police Station. After six days, the accused was traced out and again panchayath was conducted in the presence of elders who advised the accused to leave the deceased at Hyderabad as she blessed with two sons. PW1 further stated that that he came back to his village. They lived amicably for a period of one month to 45 days thereafter, the accused broke down the head of his daughter. On receipt of information through the deceased, he along with his wife went to 6 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022
Hyderabad and brought the deceased to the village and took her to the doctor for treatment and that she stayed along with them for 15 to 20 days. After that the accused came to the village along with the elders and the said elders requested the accused to send the deceased and children along with him. On their advise PW1 sent the deceased and children along with the accused. PW.1 further stated that the deceased and the accused stayed for about 15 days and thereafter the deceased came to his house and informed to him that the deceased and the accused are going to
Vemulawada Temple and requested him to join them, but he refused and gave Rs.3.000/-. After three days, the deceased and the accused returned back along with the family and stayed in the opposite house. After few minutes on the same day i.e., at about 04.00 or 04.30 p.m., his grand son by name Ramesh came to his house and informed that the accused broke down the head of the deceased with the log (Mancham kodu, Mancham Patte) of the cot and deceased was lying in a pool of the blood on the ground. Then he rushed to the scene and saw the dead body of the deceased was in a pool of blood. PW1 stated that the accused had taken away 4 ½ tula of gold chain i.e, mangala sutram from the neck of the deceased. He lodged complaint with the police.
7 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022
13.PW.2 stated that the deceased was his mother and the accused is his father. While he was studying 7th class, the accused and deceased used to do labour work and his father used to consume alcohol daily and used to come to home in drunken state.
Two days prior to 07.08.2019, deceased, the accused along with children went to Vemulawada and returned home on 07.08.2019.
On that day, as usual he along with his sisters went to school and at that time, his mother and father were quarreling. When he returned from school in the evening hours, he opened the door of the house, then he and his two sisters found his mother was in a pool of blood, then he went to his maternal grandmother’s house which is nearby and brought them. They found “Mancham patte” with blood. PW2 further stated that the accused used to consume alcohol daily and used to beat his mother daily and demanded money for drinking alcohol and the accused used to quarrel with his mother.
14.PW.3 stated that at about 17 years ago the marriage of deceased performed with the accused. After marriage he looked after his sister properly for about 6 to 7 years. Thereafter the accused addicted to consume alcohol. They blessed with three children and thereafter the accused used to beat deceased. In this connection, panchayath was conducted in presence of elders who 8 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022 advised that they will resolve the matter between the couple and the elders also advised not to file any case against the accused.
Thereafter the deceased and the accused shifted their family to
Hyderabad where the accused caused head injury to deceased.
Upon receiving phone call from elders, PW3 brought his sister to the home and his sister stayed with them for about one month. PW3 further stated that thereafter the accused requested and convinced his father PW1 that he will look after deceased properly and took her with the accused to his house at Mupparam and that he looked after deceased properly for about one month. On one day deceased, the accused along with family went to Vemulawada Devasthanam.
On the next day the accused killed deceased with “Manchampatte ” and the said information was received by him over phone. Then, he went to the scene of offence and found deceased was in a pool of blood. The accused took away all the gold belongings to deceased including pusthelathadu.
15.PW.4 who is photographer stated that on 07.08.2019 on the request of C.I of police, P.S.Dharmasagar, he took the photographs of the scene of offence and the same were handed over to police under Ex.P2 to P6 along with CD.
9 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022
16.PW.5 stated that the deceased Gattamma and the accused used to quarrel with each other on many times. On that day of death of deceased, the accused demanded money for consuming alcohol but the deceased Gattamma refused to give money, then the accused beat her and she fell down on the ground with bleeding injuries and died. When he reached the spot, he found the dead body of the deceased was in a pool of blood and there was a
Mancham patte (Wooden side railing of the cot).
17.PW.6 stated that he used to run Kirana and General store. The accused and deceased used to reside opposite to their house. The accused and deceased used to quarrel frequently. He tried to pacify the situation and advised the accused and deceased to live happily.
On the day of death of deceaed, in the morning hours also he advised the accused and the deceased to live together happily. On the same day at around 3.00 p.m., while he was in kirana shop, he heard hues and cries from the house of the accused and deceased.
Thereafter he went to the house of the accused and found the deceased was in a pool of blood and found Mancham kodu/patte near the dead body of deceased Gattamma.
18.PW.7 stated in his evidence that about five years ago when he reached the scene of offence, then the deceased Gattamma was 10 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022 already dead. There he also found Machem patte/kodu. PW7 stated that the accused taken away the gold Mangalsuthra of deceased
Gattamma and fled away. After 10 to 18 days, the accused came to him in the morning hours around 7.00 a.m, and stated to him that the police are searching for him and he was in intoxicated state and informed that he lost the gold mangalsuthra which was taken by him. Thereafter, he took the accused to police station and surrendered him before police.
19. PW.8 deposed in his evidence that the accused is his brother-in-law and the deceased Gattamma is his sister by relation.
The accused used to consume alcohol and used to quarrel with deceased when they used to reside at Hyderabad. Thereafter, they shifted the residence to Narayanagiri of Dharmasagar Mandal. After two days, he came to know that the deceased was died.
20.PW.9 and PW.10 who are the panch witnesses for the inquest panchanama deposed that they do not know what was happened in the house of deceased and the police obtained their signatures on inquest panchanama and they do not know anything about the case.
PW.9 and PW.10 did not support the case of the prosecution and they turned hostile.
11 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022
21.PW.11 deposed in his evidence that about 5 years ago in the month of August, on the request of C.I of police, he went to P.S
Dharmasagar along with Mekala Sudhakar (LW16) where the police shown the accused, then they questioned the accused what was happened. On that the accused confessed that when the deceased refused to give money for consuming alcohol, he tried to snatch away her pusthela thadu and when she resisted, then he hit her with “Mancham patte” and then she fell down on the ground with pool of blood and on seeing the same, he ran away with pusthela thadu and thereafter the he was roaming in the Warangal Railway station and on coming to know about the death of his wife, he surrendered before the police with the help of PW7. The Police noted down the same and then the police obtained his signature along with LW16-Mekala Sudhakar on the confession panchanama under Ex.P9.
22.PW.12 deposed in his evidence that about 5 years ago on the request of Police, Dharmasagar, he went to the scene of offence where he found the dead body of the the deceased/Alakunta
Gattamma, also found manchampatte and mancham Kodu, and also broken pieces of bangles. Then police drafted rough sketch of the scene and also conducted scene of offence-cum-seizure 12 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022 panchanama in his presence and LW13-M.Yellaiah and they signed on rough sketch under Ex.P10, scene of offence-cum-seizure panchanama under Ex.P11 and also crime details form under
Ex.P12.
23.PW.13 deposed in his evidence that on 07.08.2019 at 6.30 p.m., he received telephone call from SHO, Dharmasagar and requested him to visit scene of offence. Accordingly he along with fingerprint S.I and staff reached the scene at 7.30 p.m. They observed the dead body of a female and collected blood stains, control sample, blood stain swab from the wooden cot(side stick) and control sample, blood stain broken bangle pieces(red colour),
Blood stain broken bangle pieces(light green and red colour) from the scene of offence. The same was handed over to the SHO,
Dharmasagar.
24.PW.14 deposed in his evidence that on 08.08.2019 he received a requisition from SHO, PS Dharmasagar at 12.15 p.m., to conduct postmortem examination over the dead body of Alakuntla
Gattamma. Accordingly, he conducted postmortem examination at 12.30 p.m., and concluded at 2.30 p.m., he found external and internal injuries on head which are ante mortem in nature. The viscera of the deceased was sent to FSL. He opined that the cause 13 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022 of the death of the deceased was due to head injury. He issued postmortem examination report.
25.PW.15 deposed in his evidence that on 07.08.2019 at 06.15 hours, on receipt of complaint under Ex.P1 from P.W.1, he registered a case in Cr.No.124/2019 u/S.302 IPC and issued FIR under Ex.P-14. He recorded the statement of P.W.1. Later, he proceeded to scene of offence situated at Narayanagiri village, got photographed the scene of offence with the help of P.W.4. He inspected the scene and prepared scene of offence panchanama and rough sketch in the presence of P.W.12 and Yellaiah, P.W.13 visited the scene of offence and collected the material objects MO.1 and
MO.2 from the scene and the same was sent to FSL. The dead body was shifted to MGM, hospital for conducting postmortem examination. He conducted inquest under Ex.P15 over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of P.W.9 and P.W.10. PW.15 further stated that on 08.08.2019 he examined P.W.6 and P.W.5 and recorded their statements. On 26.08.2019 P.W.7 produced the accused before him. He recorded the statement of P.W.7 and prepared confession panchanama of the accused in the presence of
P.W.7 and M. Sudhakar. On the same day he effected the arrest of the accused and produced before court. He got recorded the 164 14 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022
Cr.P.C statement of P.W.7 through Principal J.F.C.M, Warangal. On collection of PME report and FSL Report under Ex.P16, he filed charge sheet against the accused.
26.To prove the the offence u/Sec.302 of I.P.C, the prosecution has to prove the motive for the offence and also intention of the accused and the death of the deceased as narrated by prosecution.
The case of the prosecution is that the accused addicted to consume alcohol for which, he raised petty quarrels with his wife for getting money from her. PW1 who is the father of the deceased categorically stated that the accused is addicted to alcohol and harassing the deceased and beating her and demanding her to provide money and PW1 further stated that prior to the death of the deceased they gave complaint to Lalaguda Police Station and after six days, the accused was traced out. Later, the accused beat the deceased, for which, he took treatment and also sutured for the injury. PW2 is the son of the deceased and he stated that the accused used to consume alcohol daily. PW.3 who is brother of the deceased stated that the deceased addicted to consume alcohol and beat the deceased and a panchayath was conducted as a result of the panchayath, the accused and deceased shifted their family to
Hyderabad and even at Hyderabad also, he caused head injury to 15 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022 the deceased. PW5, the eye witness, he stated that the deceased and the accused used to quarrel with each other and on the day of death of the deceased, the accused demanded money for consumption of alcohol, for which the deceased refused to give money, on that the accused beat her and she fell down and died with bleeding injuries. PW.6 who is the neighbour of the deceased, he categorically stated that the accused and his wife used to quarrel frequently, for which, he tried to pacify the situation. Even on the date of death of the deceased also, he advised the accused and deceased to live happily. PW.8 who is the brother-in-law of the accused, he stated that the Accused addicted to alcohol and he used to raise quarrel with his wife and a panchayath was conducted and they shifted their residence to Narayanagiri village of Dharmasagar
Mandal and after two days, he came to know that the deceased died due to quarrel by the accused. The evidence of PW2 i.e., son of the accused and the father of the deceased PW1 and the brothers of the deceased and the independent witnesses clearly shows that the accused addicted to consume alcohol and he used to raise quarrels with his wife and used to beat her for which panchayath was took place and they shifted their family to Narayanagiri village of
Dharmasagar Mandal. Within few days of shifting their family from 16 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022
Hyderabad, again the accused beat the deceased. Hence, the prosecution proved that the accused addicted to alcohol and he used to beat the deceased for money.
27.PW.2 stated that he informed to PW1 that his mother/deceased was in a pool of blood. Immediately, PW1, rushed to dead body and found the dead body of the deceased in a pool of blood. PW.2 stated that on his return to school in the evening hours, he opened the door along with his two sisters and found his mother fell in a pool of blood and on seeing the same, they brought PW1 and informed to PW1. PW5 who is the independent witness and the neighbour categorically stated that the accused demanded money for consuming alcohol but deceased Gattamma refused to give money then the accused beat the deceased/Gattamma and she fell down with bleeding injuries and died. When he reached the spot found the dead body of the deceased in a pool of blood and there was a mancham patte (Wooden side railing of the cot). PW.6 who is running kirana shop nearby the house of the accused, he stated that at about 3.00 p.m., while he was in kirana shop, he heard hues and cries at the house of accused and deceased, then he went to the house of deceased and found dead body of the deceased in a pool of blood.
17 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022
28.The evidence of PW.2 shows that while he was going to school along with his sisters, the accused and deceased were in their house. As per the evidence of PW.6 on the day of death of the deceased in the morning hours also, PW.6 also advised the accused and the deceased to live together happily. PW.1 also stated that the accused, deceased and his family members returned from
Vemulawada and stayed in their house. These facts clearly shows that on the date of the death of the deceased when their children were proceeding to the school in the morning hours, the accused was in the house in the company of the deceased. When PW2 returned from school, he observed that the deceased fell in a pool of blood and presence of accused was not there.
29.It is a prudent principle that when the husband and wife are living together with their family in a dwelling house, the husband has to explain the cause of the death of the deceased. This is a peculiar case in which at the time of examination of the accused u/Sec. 228 Cr.P.C, he admitted the offence. Later, the counsel who defended the accused i.e., legal aid counsel has taken the plea while cross-examining the accused denying the offence committed by the accused which clearly shows that legal aid counsel has not taken the 18 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022 proper defence in cross-examination and failed to cross-examine the prosecution wihtout inconsanance with the plea of the accused.
30.In this context, it is relevant to refer the plea of the accused made u/Sec.228 of Cr.P.C which is as follows :- నాకు నా భార్య�కి గొడవ జరిగిం�ది. కోపం� వచ్చి� కర్య�తో తన తల మీద బాదిన చనిపోతుం�దని అనుకోలేదు. నాకు చ�పే ఉద్దే'శం� లేదు. విచారి�చ�డి ( the dispute took place between the accused and his wife, for which he got anger and beat the deceased on her head with a stick and he has not apprehend that his wife will die and he has no intention to kill her and sought for conducting trial).
31.The evidence of prosecution witnesses and admission made by the accused u/Sec.228 of Cr.P.C examination clearly evident that the admission made by the accused is corroborating with the chief examination of prosecution witnesses. The evidence of prosecution i.e., PW.1, PW.2 ,PW.3, PW.5, PW.6 and PW.8 clearly evident that the accused is raising quarrels with the deceased. In the admission, the accused stated that the dispute took place between the accused and his wife, for which he grew wild and beat her with stick. The evidence of prosecution witnesses, PW1,PW.2,PW.3 and PW.8 clearly shows that the accused is habituated to quarrel with his wife and used to beat her frequently. The past events as narrated by 19 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022
PW.1, PW.3, PW.6 and PW.8 clearly evident that the deceased frequently quarreled with the deceased and used to beat her.
32.The Postmortem Examination report shows that the deceased died due to Head injury. The accused made his admission clearly that he beat her with stick.
33.In view of the above discussion, it is proved that the deceased died due to injury caused by the accused.
34.Whether the accused had any intention to kill the deceased is to be ascertained. The evidence of PW.1, PW.2, PW.3, PW.6, PW.7 and PW.8 clearly evident that the accused addicted to alcohol and used to raise quarrels with the deceased for getting money and there are past instances, for which panchayath was took place and they were again lived peacefully for some period. These facts and the evidence clearly shows that the deceased was addicted to alcohol for which he demanding money from his wife. The manner in which the accused beat the deceased clearly evident that he beat the deceased in a grave and sudden provocation. These facts clearly shows that the accused has no intention to kill the deceased. The manner in which the accused beat the deceased and the admission made by the accused clearly evident that the death of the deceased 20 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022 is an outcome of a quarrel between the husband and wife and the manner in which the accused beat the deceased is that he gave blow to the deceased with a stick and there is no other injuries which clearly shows that the offence committed by the accused is amounts to culpable homicide not amount to murder.
35.In this context, I am relying on a judgment reported in “1993
Criminal Law Journal 3253 (Supreme Court) Ramaswmay Vs.
State of Tamilnadu” where in the Hon’ble Supreme Court held :-
That the accused inflicted a single blow which caused the death of the victim out of the quarrel and held that the offence committed by the accused is culpable homicide not amount to murder.
36.The case on hand that the accused has beat the deceased not only for the first time but there are past events that the accused used to beat the deceased. Hence, the offence committed by the accused is comes under Sec.304-part II of I.P.C.
37. In view of the above discussion, the prosecution has miserably failed to prove that the accused killed the deceased with an intention and the prosecution proved that the accused beat the deceased without any intention to kill her and caused bodily injury.
It is a prudent principle that when a person beat the other one with 21 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022 a stick on the vital part i.e., on head, he supposed to know that the said blow will cause death. The evidence available on record clearly proves that the accused beat the deceased without any intention to kill her. Hence, prosecution proved that the accused beat the deceased without any intention but he is having knowledge i.e., it is likely to cause death which punishable u/Sec.304-part II of I.P.C and the prosecution miserably failed to prove the offence u/Sec.302 of I.P.C.
38.In view of above discussion, it is proved that the accused committed the offence u/Sec.304-part II of I.P.C. Accordingly informed to the accused.
Sd/-
PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
HANUMAKONDA.
FAC.II-ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE,
HANUMAKONDA.
39.The accused produced from District Jail, Khammam and the sentence contemplated u/Sec.304-Part-II of I.P.C is explained to the accused and he pleaded mercy of the Court. On considering the circumstances of the case, the accused is sentenced to undergo
Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 8 (eight years) for the offence punishable u/Sec.304-Part II of I.P.C.
22 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022
40. IN THE RESULT, accused is not found guilty for the offence punishable u/Sec.302 of I.P.C and he is found guilty for the offence punishable under section 304-Part II of I.P.C and he is convicted under section 235(2) Cr.P.C and he is sentenced to undergo
Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 8 (eight years). The remand period if any shall be set off U/Sec.428 of Cr.P.C. MO.1 and MO.2 and unmarked property if any shall be destroyed after the lapse of appeal time.
(Dictated to Stenographer Gr-I, after transcription, corrected and
pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 7 th day of
February , 2025).
Sd/-
PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
HANUMAKONDA.
FAC.II-ADDl. SESSIONS JUDGE,
HANUMAKONDA.
Appendix of Evidence
Witnesses examined.
FOR PROSECUTION: P.W.1: Vallepu Mallaiah (Defacto complainant and father of the deceased) P.W.2: Alakunta Ramesh (Son of the deceased and accused) P.W.3: Vallepu Ramesh (Brother of the deceased and circumstantial witness) P.W.4: Basaboina Raju (Photographer) P.W.5: Kothi Sammaiah (Circumstantial witness) P.W.6: Peddi Srinivas (Circumstantial witness) 23 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022
P.W.7: Manimaddi Yellaiah (Village elder). P.W.8: Vallepu Kumar(Neighbour of the accused) P.W.9: Modem Vasantha (Panch witness for inquest panchanama) P.W.10: Munja Venkataiah (Panch witness for inquest panchanama) P.W.11: Wallepu Mogili ((Panch witness for confession panchanama) P.W.12: Mohd Raheem Pasha (Panch witness for Crime Details Form and scene of offence panchanama) P.W.13: Medipally Ramesh (Head Constable who collected the material objects from the scene of offence) P.W.14: Dr.Raza Malik Khan (Asst. Professor who conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased) P.W.15: Md.Shadullah Baba (Investigating Officer)
FOR DEFENCE None
No.of DatedDescription of document Exhibit
Ex.P-107.08.2019Complaint
Ex.P-2 to --Photographs along with CD Ex.P6
Ex.P-708.08.2019Signature portion of PW.9 on inquest panchanama
Ex.P-808.08.2019Signature portion of PW.10 on inquest panchanama
Ex.P-926.08.2019Confession panchanama
Ex.P-1007.08.2019Rough sketch
Ex.P-1107.08.2019Sceneofoffence-cum-Seizure panchanama
Ex.P-1207.08.2019Crime Details Form
Ex.P-1308.08.2019Postmortem Examination Report of the deceased
Exs.P-1407.08.2019First Information Report
Ex.P-1508.08.2019Inquest Report
Ex.P-1621.10.2019F.S.L Report 24 of 24 SC No.283 OF 2022
FOR DEFENCE : -Nil-
Material Objects marked.
MO.1 : Wooden Cot Stick
MO.2 : Wooden Cot leg
Sd/-
PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
HANUMAKONDA.
FAC.II-ADDl. SESSIONS JUDGE,
HANUMAKONDA.