1
IN THE COURT OF THE IV ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE
EAST GODAVARI AT KAKINADA
Present:-Smt.P.Kamala Devi
IV Additional Sessions Judge, Kakinada Friday, the 11th day of November, 2022
SESSIONS CASE No.78 of 2020
Between:
State:Inspector of Police, Kakinada Rural.
... Complainant.
And
1.Karri Radha Krishna, S/o late Apparao. 33 yrs, D.No.9-13, Pepakayalapalem(V), Karapa(M).
2. Peketi Nagalaxmi,W/o late Suryanarayana @ Suribabu, 22 yrs, D.No.8-137, Pepakayalapalem village,
Karapa Mandal. ... Accused.
The Prosecution is conducted by Additional Public Prosecutor and the accused is defended by Sri Vemana Ashok Kumar, Advocate for A.1 and Sri
K.S.Srinivasarao, Advocate for A.2.
This case was committed by the Spl.J.F.C.Magistrate for P&E, Kakinada in P.R.C.No.10/2019 on its file and the case was taken on file as
S.C.No.78/2020 by the Principal Sessions Judge, Rajamahendravaram and the same was made over to this Court for disposal according to law.
This case coming on 3-11-2022 for final hearing before me and having stood over for consideration till this day, the Court delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
The Inspector of Police, Kakinada Rural filed charge sheet against A.1 and A.2 for the offence punishable U/Sec.120-B, 302 and 201 of I.P.C relating to Cr.No.127/2019 of Karapa Police Station.
2.The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:-
(a) There is an illegal intimacy between A.1 and A.2 since 3 years to the filing of charge sheet. A.1 is well known person to all the family members of A.2. A.1 frequently visiting the house of A.2 and moved with the father of A.2 closely. A.1 developed illegal intimacy with A.2 enjoying her sexually at the terrace of her building. The parents of A.2 proposed to perform her marriage with the deceased Peketi Suryanarayana @ Suribabu 2 and held betrothal function on 18-4-2019. At that time, A.2 told A.1 that she was not interested to marry as she likes him. Then A.1 made counseling to
A.2 and made her to marry with the deceased Suryanarayana. On 15-5-2019 the marriage of A.2 was performed with the deceased Suryanarayana @
Suribabu. But, first night was not done between A.2 and her husband, as she dislikes her husband. On 21-5-2019 noon whenever A.1 went to the house of
A.2, she expressed him that she could not adjust with her husband(deceased) proposed him to get rid of her husband and instigated
A.1 to kill her husband at anywhere without any suspicion.
(b) Further, at the instance and abatement of A.2, A.1 hatched up a plan to kill the deceased, telephoned to the deceased on 21-5-2019 evening at about 5-30 p.m., asked him to come to Penuguduru bridge to spend some time at lonely place. Then the deceased agreed to come. At that time, A.1 picked out the curved knife available at the pump shed which is situated very nearer to Penuguduru bridge and after passing some time, the deceased came to Penuguduru bridge on his motor cycle, where they both chitchatting with each other and later A.1 purchased some eatables and soft drink and from there A.1 took the deceased to the paddy fields situated by the right side of Penuguduru bridge, Patarlagadda road, where they both parked their motor cycles in the lay-out sites, sat on the bund, chitchatting by spending some time while the deceased Suribabu was watching cell phone, A.1 taking it an advantage to kill him, took the curved knife from the motor cycle front cover, brutally hacked on his head from back side twice or thrice, as a result the deceased sustained multiple bleeding injury on his head and collapsed on the ground and died instantaneously. With a view to suppress the evidence of murder, A.1 dragged the dead body of the deceased into the paddy fields and with an intent to mislead the offence collected gold hand bracelet from the hand of the deceased and cut away 3 the gold chain from his neck by using a cutter, secreted the dead body at the paddy fields edge by covering dry grass on it and escaped from the spot.
(c) On the strength of report of L.W.1-Peketi Sathibabu, brother of deceased, L.W.21-G.Appalaraju, SI of Police, Karapa police registered the same as a case in Cr.No.127/2019 u/sec.302 of IPC and investigated into.
(d) During the course of investigation, L.W.22-Inspector of Police,
Kakinada rural visited the scene of offence, examined it minutely in the presence of mediators(L.W.15 and 16), prepared scene observation report, got photographed the scene of offence by engaging a private photographer (L.W.10), collected the blood stained earth from the scene of offence, prepared rough sketch of the scene of offence, held inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of panchayat dars(L.W.15 to 17), blood relatives and witnesses, examined the witnesses and recorded their statements and forwarded the dead body of the deceased for PM examination, seized three gold rings, one silver ring, one Fast Track Watch on the dead body of the deceased and Hero Honda CBZ Motor cycle bearing
No.AP 05 BV 0631 of the deceased available at the scene of offence and handed over to L.W.1 after having obtained due acknowledgement.
(e) On 30-5-2019 at 8 a.m., L.W.22-Inspector of Police arrested A.1 at
Railway gate, Karapa village in the presence of mediators L.W.18-K.Nagaraju and L.W.19-Palivela Yesubabu and recorded his confessional statement, seized a gold bracelet, gold chain and his Pulsar Motor cycle bearing No.AP 05 EV 1450 in the presence of mediators under the cover of mediators report and got weighed the gold ornaments seized from the possession of A.1 by
L.w.14. In his confessional statement, A.1 voluntarily admitted his guilt of offence of murder about the involvement of A.2 who conspired with him to kill her husband, abetted A.1 for committing the offence of murder. In pursuance of the confession made by A.1, seized the blood stained clothes of the accused i.e., a blood stained snuff colour “T” shirt, blood stained blue 4 colour jean pant, crime weapon i.e., curved knife having blood stains in the presence of mediators under the cover of mediators report and he also arrested A.2 who is the wedded wife of the deceased at D.No.8-137,
Pepakayalapalem village on 30-5-2019 at 12-30 p.m., in the presence of mediators and got recorded her confessional statement and sent them to the court for remand along with altered section of law FIR.
(f) L.W.20-Dr.D.Durga Prasad, Associate Professor, Forensic Medicine
Department, RMC, GGH, Kakinada conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased and issued Post Mortem certificate. L.W.22-Inspector of Police sent the material objects to RFSL, Vijayawada for chemical analysis report through SDPO, Kakinada and received chemical analysis report and after completion of investigation, he filed charge sheet. Hence, the charge.
3.The learned Spl.JFC Magistrate for P&E, Kakinada took cognizance of offence punishable U/Secs.302 and 201 of IPC against the accused persons and registered the case as P.R.C.No.10/2019.
4.After appearance of accused persons before the learned Magistrate they were furnished with copies of documents relied by the prosecution in compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C.
5.As the offence U/Secs.302 and 201 of IPC are exclusively triable by the
Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate has committed the case U/Sec.209
Cr.P.C to the Court of Sessions, East Godavari Division, Rajamahendravaram vide committal order dated 11-2-2020.
6. The learned Sessions Judge, East Godavari at Rajamendravaram after receipt of record from the learned Magistrate registered the case as
S.C.No.78/2020 and made over the case to this Court for disposal in accordance with law.
7.After appearance of A.1 and A.2 before this Court and after consideration, charges U/Secs.302 and 201 IPC were framed against accused 5 persons read over and explained to them in Telugu, for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
8. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 17 and exhibited Exs.P-1 to P-10 and M.Os.1 to 18 and Ex.X.1 and X.2.
9.The A.1 and A.2 were examined U/s 313 Cr.P.C and the incriminating material available in the evidence of prosecution witnesses is explained to them in Telugu and they denied the same. However, they did not choose to examine any witnesses on their behalf.
10.Heard the arguments of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for accused.
11.The learned APP submitted her arguments contending as follows:
The confessional statement before police by A.1 and A.2 clearly establishes the motive for murdering the deceased. The evidence of P.Ws 6 to 8 is very much important to prove the last seen theory who witnessed the deceased and A.1 together while chit chatting near Patharlagadda road.
P.W.6 to 8 supported the version of prosecution. They deposed that they witnessed both A.1 and deceased Suryanarayana talking with each other.
They are independent witnesses and there is no enmity between them and accused, therefore there is no necessity to give false evidence by them.
Coming to recovery of gold articles i.e., gold chain and bracelet.
The evidence of P.W.12 is crucial. His evidence establishes that police people seized gold chain and bracelet from the deceased by A.1. P.W.13 and 14 evidence is crucial to prove the call data of mobile numbers of A.1 and A.2 during the relevant period to establish the motive and intention on the part of the accused each forms part of chain circumstances to prove the offence.
The call records establish the details of phone calls between accused and deceased. The next important evidence is medical evidence i.e., evidence of P.W.11 who conducted PM examination over the dead body of the 6 deceased and the evidence of Investigating Officer. Their evidence proves the case of prosecution and their evidence is corroborating with the evidence of other witnesses. Thus, the prosecution proved the case against A.1 and
A.2 beyond all reasonable doubt. Therefore, they are liable to be punished for all the charges leveled against them.
12. On the other hand, the learned counsel for A.1 submitted his arguments contending as follows:
As per complaint given by P.W.1 the name of A.1 and A.2 not mentioned and missing of gold articles said to be seized from the possession of A.1 were also not mentioned the illegal intimacy between A.1 and A.2 was also not mentioned. The police people developed the said version after detaining the A.1 in illegal custody for a period of 10 days and created all the documents as per their convenience by falsely implicating A.1 in this case.
He further submitted his arguments contending that prosecution miserably failed to prove the motive of the A.1 i.e., illegal intimacy between A.1 and A.2 for murdering the deceased by A.1, as no prosecution witness speak about the movements of A.1 and A.2 closely or there was illegal intimacy between them. He also argued that the prosecution failed to seize mobiles said to be used by either A.1, A.2 or deceased, along with sims and also failed to prove the ownership of said mobiles by placing cogent evidence.
He further submitted that even though prosecution examined P.Ws 13 and 14 to prove the conversation among A.1 and A.2 prior to death of the deceased and marked Ex.X.1 this document (subject to objection), those details could not be looked into as they are not admissible evidence, as they failed to file certificate under Sec.65-B Indian Evidence Act. Hence, those details could not be used to prove the case of the prosecution. Prosecution planted P.Ws 6 to 8 for the purpose of proving last seen theory. But they are only chance witnesses, if really P.W.6 to 8 saw A.1 and deceased together on 7 21-5-2019 during 6 to 7-30 p.m., they would have to give a complaint before police. But they did not give any complaint, given by P.W.1, even though missing of deceased was spreaded in the surrounding village and village of
P.W.1 in the night of 21-5-2019 itself. So it further shows that these witnesses were planted by police. Hence, their evidence could not be useful to prove the case of the prosecution. Admittedly there is no eye witness to the incident, prosecution failed to prove the circumstantial evidence link of all chains leading to involvement of A.1 in this offence or last seen theory as required under law. Prosecution also failed to prove the seizure of gold chain and bracelet from the possession of A.1 connecting the A.1 with the offence involved in this crime, as prosecution failed to conduct any test identification parade regarding the identification of gold articles by P.W.1. All the above mentioned circumstances shows that the prosecution miserably failed to prove any of the charges levelled against A.1 beyond all reasonable doubt.
Therefore, A.1 is entitled for acquittal for all charges levelled against him.
13.The counsel for A.2 submitted his arguments contending as follows:
The prosecution failed to prove the illegal intimacy between A.1 and
A.2 as there was no such illegal intimacy between them. Likewise prosecution also failed to prove the ownership of mobiles covered under
Ex.X.1 belongs to A.1 and A.2 and also failed to seize mobiles and sims from their possession. So the said alleged instigation by A.2 to A.1 is not proved.
Thus, it makes clear that A.2 is not involved in any of the charges levelled against her, therefore, she is entitled for clean acquittal.
14.Now, the point for determination is:
Whether the prosecution has proved the charges leveled against the
A.1 and A.2 for the offence under Secs.302 and 201 of IPC beyond all reasonable doubt or not?
8
15.Point:- The case of prosecution as per the written report filed by brother of deceased in brief is as follows:
He is resident of Neelayyathota bearing D.No.2-223 of Karapa village.
He is living along with his family members in that house. The deceased
Peketi Suryanarayana is his 4th brother. He is working as a Maths lecturer in
Vikas Junior college. On 15-5-2019 his brother marriage was performed with
Nagalaxmi, D/o M.Venkateswararao, R/o Pepakayalapalem. On 21-5-2019 his brother came to his house from his in-laws house and went to his in-laws house at 4 p.m., to meet his wife. On the same day about 6 p.m., his brother left their house by saying to his wife that he will come back by 8 p.m., and that he did not return back till 9 p.m., on which father in law of his brother telephoned to P.Krishna. Thereafter cell phone of P.Suryanarayana was found switched off on which the defacto complainant, his brother Krishna, Srinu,
Paparao and others watched for his brother on that night. Again on 22-5- 2019 at 10 a.m., they found the dead body of his brother under dry grass near Patarlagadda bridge adjacent to the right side road and also the two wheeler of his brother towards south side at a distance of 50 meters of his brother. They also noticed dried blood at the distance of 20 meters from the dead body of his brother. As seen from the injury on the dead body of his brother some unknown persons murdered his brother with a deadly weapon.
Thus, he requested to enquire the matter and do justice.
16. The case of the accused as per the suggestions put to prosecution witnesses in brief is as follows:
A.1 is nothing to do with the crime and that there was no illegal intimacy between A.1 and A.2. In the place where they traced out the dead body of the deceased is an open place and no one could present at that place after 6 p.m., due to darkness. Due to political rivalry at the instance of rival local people, the police foisted the false case against A.1 and that there is no conspiracy in between A.1 and A.2 and that the entire investigation of 9 the police is table investigation and the A.1 is falsely implicated in this crime and that there is no acquaintance between A.1 and deceased Suryanarayana @ Suribabu.
17.The burden lies on the prosecution to establish that accused persons committed the offence punishable under Secs.302 and 201 of IPC beyond all reasonable doubt.
18.In order to prove the case of prosecution, prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 17 besides marking Ex.P1 to P10 and M.Os.1 to 18 and Ex.X.1.
19.P.W.1 who is no other than the brother of the deceased-cum-defacto- complainant, P.W.2 and P.W.4 are brother and mother of deceased and P.W.3 who is relative of deceased, their version is as follows:
The marriage of deceased Peketi Suryanarayana @ Suribabu was performed with A.2 on 15-5-2019 at the place of parents of A.2. On 21-5- 2019 the deceased came to the house of P.W.1 and 4 and went to his in-laws house at 4 p.m. Thereafter P.W.2 received a phone call from the father of A.2 that the deceased was not come to the house even after 9 p.m., on that day.
Then informed the same to P.W.1, then they all P.Ws 1 to 3 and others tried to contact with the deceased Suryanarayana by calling him with their mobiles and found that his mobile was switched off. Then all of them and others together and separately searched for deceased Suryanarayana in different places, but they could not trace him. Again on the next day morning also, they searched for him at Gollapalem road and noticed the parking of bike belongs to the deceased P.Suryanarayana in the site of Siva Prasad. Then they searched surrounding of the bike and they found the dead body of the deceased in the fields of Krishna Chaitanya covered with dry grass. On verifying the dead body of the deceased, they found the injuries on the top of his head. On which P.W.1 went to Karapa PS and gave complaint to the police. Thereafter police people came to the place, examined and held 10 inquest over the dead body of the deceased and seized the gold rings three in number and silver ring, one watch from the dead body of the deceased and handed over the same to P.W.1 after due acknowledgment. During inquest all the panchayat dars including blood relatives opined that some unknown persons murdered the deceased. Then the dead body of the deceased shifted to GGH, Kakinada for PM examination and thereafter the dead body of the deceased was given to the blood relatives of the deceased.
Subsequently, they came to know that there was illegal intimacy between
A.1 and A.2 and that they conspired together and murdered the deceased
Peketi Suryanarayana @ Suribabu.
20.P.W.5 who is no other than the photographer his version is that about 3 years ago at about 12 noon, he was called by Karapa Police to come to the fields of Krishna Chaitanya situated in the Penuguduru village,
Gollapalem road to take photographs of one dead body. Accordingly, he went there and took photographs of the dead body of the deceased as per the directions of the police and handed over the photos to the police which are marked under Ex.P.2.
21.P.Ws 6 to 8 who are said to be witnessed the deceased and A.1 together lastly before the murder of the deceased.
(a) The version of P.W.6 is that, on 21-5-2019 in between 6 to 7 p.m., he was going to Gorripudi from Karapa on his bike to purchase material at
Gorripudi. He saw A.1 and deceased Suryanarayana were going on their respective bikes towards Patharlagadd road towards site. He went to
Gorripudi and enquired about material while he was coming back to Karapa from Gorripudi at about 8 p.m., he saw A.1 alone near pump set was going on his bike on which, he asked him where is Suribabu. On which A.1 went away without answering his question on his bike hurriedly. He came to know from his villagers that Suribabu was murdered by some unknown persons on 23-5-2019 and he stated before police that he got suspicion about A.1 as he 11 saw both A.1 and Suribabu while he was going to Gorripudi and he saw only
A.1 while he was coming to Karapa and A.1 left away without answering his question hurriedly.
(b) The version of P.W.7 is that on 21-5-2019 at about 6-45 p.m., he was coming from Ramalingeswara Rice Mill after completion of his work to go to Karapa on a bullock cart. When he reached to Penuguduru bridge, he saw
A.1 and Suribabu parking their motor cycle and standing near motor cycles and talking with each other and on the next day after noon, he came to know that the Suribabu was murdered by some unknown persons.
(c) The version of P.W.8 is that on 21-5-2019 around 06.30 P.M., he was going to Patharlagadda via Penuguduru Bridge, he noticed A.1 and Suribabu near Y.S.R. statue parking their vehicles near them. He also noticed that A.1 and Suribabu were going on their respective bikes towards layout site near pump set while he was coming on the bridge. Thereafter, he went to
Patharlagadda and supplied the milk and he was coming to Penuguduru village when he reached to Patharlagadda road, he noticed that A.1 alone was coming on his bike from site speedily. On 22.05.2019, he came to know from his father during night time that Suribabu was murdered on which he informed to his father that he witnessed that he noticed A.1 and Suribabu near Y.S.R. statue parking their vehicles near them and that he also noticed that A.1 and Suribabu were going on their respective bikes towards layout site near pump set while he was coming on the bridge. Thereafter, he went to Patharlagadda and supplied the milk and he was coming to Penuguduru village when he reached to Patharlagadda road, he noticed that A.1 alone was coming on his bike from site speedily.
22. P.W.9 who weighed the gold items, his version is that on 30.05.2019 at about 09.00 A.M., while he was in his shop, Police constable of Karapa P.S.
came to his shop and asked him to come to Railway gate, Karapa with 12 weighing machine as they arrested one accused and seized gold from him for weighing the gold. Accordingly, he accompanied the Constable along with weighing machine and reached the Railway Gate, Karapa. Inspectorof police, constable, A.1 and others were present and that he weighed the gold bracelet and gold chain and he found bracelet is weighing 20.400 gms and chain is 16.600 gms. Accordingly, he gave chits to the police.
23. P.W.10 the then VRO of Gurajanapalli village and in charge of
Penuguduru village who is said to be acted as mediator at the time of preparation of scene observation cum seizure nama and inquest report, his version is that on 22-5-2019 at about 12.00 Noon, while he was in the
Revenue Office at Gurjanapalli Village, he received phone call from Karapa
P.S., asking him to come to the place where the murder was committed which is in the fields of Nallamilli Krishna Chaitanya, accordingly, himself,
L.W.16-P. Srinivas Harichandra Prasadrao rushed to the spot. By that time police people and blood relatives of the deceased were present and that they found the injury on the top of the head of the dead body and also found the blood stains on the floor near the dead body and one vehicle bearing registration number AP 05-0631 (CBZ vehicle) which is at a distance of 180 meters from the dead body, two gold rings designing ‘H’ and ‘S’ on the left fingers and Saibaba gold ring and one silver stone ring on the right finger of the dead body and also found one wrist watch on the left hand of the dead body. Police people seized three gold rings and one silver ring and one wrist watch, vehicle, blood stained earth and controlled earth in his presence and in the presence of L.W.16-P.S.H.Prasadrao under a cover of Ex.P.3 scene observation cum seizure nama. It bears his signature, signature of P.W.1 and
Inspector of police and others. At about 02.00 P.M inquest was held over the dead body of the Peketi Suryanarayana @ Suribabu in his presence and in the presence of L.W.16-P.S.H.Prasad Rao, L.W.17- B. Kondalarao and blood 13 relatives of the deceased by police people. They all the blood relatives and panchayat dars opined that Suribabu was murdered by some unknown person with dangerous weapon. On that he drafted Ex.P.4 inquest report which bears his signature and L.W.16-P.S.H. Prasad Rao and L.W.17-B.
Kondalarao as panchayat dars.
24.P.W.11 who conducted Post Mortem Examination over the dead body of the deceased Peketi Suryanarayana @ Suribabu his version is that on 23-5-2019 at about 9-15 a.m., he received requisition from Inspector of
Police, Kakinada rural to conduct PM examination over the dead body of the deceased P.Suryanarayana. Accordingly, he conducted PM examination and noticed the external and internal injuries found on the dead body of the deceased stated that the approximate time of death is 36-48 hours prior to his examination and issued Ex.P.5 Post Mortem report opined that the cause of death of the deceased due to head injury.
25.P.W.12 the then VRO of Karapa-II who acted as mediator for arrest of A1 and A.2 and preparation of arrest cum seizure Mahazarnama his version is that on 30.05.2019 at about 07.00 A.M., he received phone call from C.I. of police, Karapa Police station and requested him to act a mediator for arrest of accused and for preparing of mediator nama and asked him to come to Karapa P.S., himself and L.W.19- Palivela Yesebu went to the Karapa
P.S., at 07.45 A.M. Then they and police people went to Railway gate,
Pepayakayalapalem in a police jeep. On seeing the police jeep, one person who was going on a bike was skulk away. On that, C.I. of police with the help of his staff caught hold him and interrogated him. On interrogation, the said person revealed his name as Karri Radhakrishna and he is resident of Karapa
Village and confessed the commission of offence and handed over one gold bracelet and one gold chain to the police. Police people seized those gold 14 items by putting in a cover and affixed slips and obtained their signatures.
Police also seized Pulsar bike from the possession of said Radha Krishna in their presence under the cover of mahajar. Ex.P.6 is the seizure mahajar of
Bracelet, gold chain and Pulsar bike which bears his signature and signature of L.W.19-P. Yesebu. Police people arrested A.1 in their presence.
Further, on the same day at about 10.00 A.M., the accused lead them to near Devunimanyam, Toddy tree and brought knife, cutting plier and blood stained “T” shirt and pant. Police people seized those items under a cover of mahajar. Ex.P.7 is the Mahajar dated 30.05.2019 at 10.00 to 11.00 AM which bears his signature. MO.1 is the curved Knife. MO.2 is the cutting plier.
MO.3 is the blood stained blue colour jean pant. MO.4 is the snuff colour “T” shirt having light cement colour cross border designs. MO.5 is the pulsar motor bike bearing registration No. AP 05 EV 1450. Again they rushed to house of A.2 situated at Karapa Village at about 11.30 A.M. Police interrogated A.2 she revealed her name and address particulars and etc., and she confessed the commission of offence. Police people arrested A.2 in their presence.
26.P.W.13 who is Nodal officer in Bharati Airtel Limited, Hyderabad who issued hard copy mail details of mobile No.800294968 his version is that on 27-5-2019 he received a requisition through mail from Addl.S.P., East
Godavari District seeking the call details of mobile No.800894968 for the period from 1-5-2019 to 22-5-2019. Accordingly, he provided the call details through their mail to the mail of Addl.S.P, East Godavari District The hard copy of said mail details marked as Ex.X.1 subject to objection.
27.P.W.14 who is the Nodal officer in Voda Fone Idea Limited,
Hyderabad issued call details of mobile No.8499967280 his version is that, on 27-5-2019 he received a requisition through mail from Addl.S.P., East 15
Godavari District seeking the call details of mobile No.8499967280 for the period from 1-5-2019 to 22-5-2019. Accordingly, he provided the call details through their mail to the mail of Addl.S.P, East Godavari District. He has not sent certificate u/sec.65-B of Indian Evidence Act in that mail apart from the call details.
28.P.W.15 who registered the case basing on the complaint given by
P.W.1 his version is that on 22.05.2019 at about 11.00 A.M., while he was in
Karapa police station, P.W.1 came to their police station and submitted a written report. Basing on the written report, he registered a case in Cr.No.
127/2019 for the offence under section 302 IPC. Accordingly, he issued
Ex.P.8 F.I.R and he gave the information about the offence to the C.I. of police for investigation.
29.P.W.16 who investigated the case his version is that
(a) on 22.05.2019, he received information from P.W.15 about registration of Crime Number 127/2019 U/sec. 302 IPC. Immediately, he rushed to the Karapa P.S and received copy of F.I.R. and perused the same and he took up investigation in this case. Meanwhile he informed the Dog
Squad, Clues team to visit the scene of offence and also secured the mediators P.W.10 and L.W.16-P. S.Harichandra Prasada Rao and he visited the scene of offence along with his staff and mediators. The scene of offence which is situated at the paddy fields of Nallamalli Krishna Chaitanya of
Penuguduru village which is situated western side of the road, which is right side of the Penuguduru Patharlagadda Village in the layout of Kondappali
Siva Prasad and examined the scene of offence minutely in the presence of mediators and found dead body of deceased and they found CBZ motor cycle bearing number AP 05 BV 0631 and they also found a pool of blood on the ground and they also found some property on the dead body i.e., gold ring having ‘S’ letter, another gold ring having ‘H’ letter, one Sai baba idol gold 16 ring, one silver ring with stone, one fastrack watch and M.O.15-Pair of chappels and seized under the cover of scene observation report/Ex.P.3.
There, he collected M.O.14 blood stained earth and controlled earth from the scene of offence packed them separately in two polythin covers and affixed slips of signatures having mediators and himself.
(b) Further he got photographed the scene of offence with a private photographer P.W.5. Ex.P.2 is the said photographs. He also prepared Ex.P.9 rough sketch of the scene of offence. He got drafted a complete scene observation report by the mediators. Ex.P.3 is the said scene observation report. Meanwhile dog squad and clues team arrived at the scene of offence and they searched for the chance prints and clues. Then he secured the presence of panchayat dars P.W.10 and L.W.16-P.S.H. Prasadrao and L.W.17-
Bhogireddi Kondala rao and served summons on them and conducted inquest over the dead body of deceased in the presence of panchayat dars and blood relatives P.Ws.1 and 2, L.W.2-P. Srinu, L.W.4-P. Venkanna and
L.W.5-Devu Paparao. Inquest held from 02.00 P.M. to 05.00 P.M. by the panchayat dars. On hearing the contents of the F.I.R., observation of the scene of offence, on witnessing the state of the dead body, all the witnesses, blood relatives, panchayat dars unanimously opined that the deceased Peketi
Suryanarayana @ Suribabu was murdered by some unknown persons with a sharp edged weapon or an Iron rod for reasons known to the unknown offenders. During the course of inquest, he examined P.W.1 and 2, L.W.2-P.
Srinu, L.W.4-P. Venkanna and L.W.5-Devu Paparao and recorded their statements. Before sending the dead body to the post mortem examination, he collected the property i.e., gold ring having ‘S’ letter, another gold ring having ‘H’ letter, one sai baba idol gold ring, one silver ring with stone, one fastrack watch and CBZ Motor cycle and handed over the property to the complainant P.W.1 who is the brother of deceased.
17
(c) Further he forwarded corpse to the Forensic Medicine, Government
General Hospital, Kakinada for autopsy through PC 1750 of Karapa P.S., and he also instructed P.C. 1750 to collect the blood stained clothes of deceased after completion of post mortem examination. Later, he seized the same clothes from the dead body of the deceased. MO.16 is the A Cement colour
Full hands shirt having black colour strips. MO.17 is the Blue colour Jean pant. MO.18is the Black dixcy scot company underwear of the deceased.
Later, he visited the house of the parents of the deceased situated at
Neelayyathota village. There, he secured the presence of L.W.7-P. Ramudu,
L.W.9-A. Eswararao and examined them and recorded their statements.
Later, he proceeded to Pepakayala palem, where he secured the presence of
A.2/wife of deceased and examined her and recorded her statement. Then he secured the presence of P.W.5 and examined him and recorded his statement.
(d) Further, on the same day i.e., on 22.05.2019, he secured phone numbers of deceased and wife of the deceased and some other numbers i.e., suspect Numbers 1 and 2- 8179892492, 8008294968 and he applied for the call details of above said mobile numbers through Superintendent of Police,
East Godavari. On 23.05.2019, he visited Karapa Police station where he secured the presence of P.W.6 to 8 and examined them and recorded their statements. Basing on the evidence collected from the above witnesses, suspicion over the Karri Radha Krishna/A.1 is come to conclusion that he might have murdered the deceased. When he searched for him, he was in absconding. On 29.05.2019, he received call details of the applied numbers and verified and came to conclusion that Karri Radha Krishna/A.1 and Peketi
Naga Lakshmi/A.2 who conspired and planned and murdered the deceased.
(e) Further, on 30.05.2019, on credible information, he instructed S.I. of
Police, Karapa to secure mediators at the police station and he visited the police station. There, he collected the mediators P.W.12 and L.W.19-P.
18
Yesubabu along with his staff and explained them of their necessity to be a mediators. Then, he proceeded to Karapa Railway gate which is situated at
Karapa, Pepakayalapalem road where they found one person is going to
Karapa side on motor cycle and on seeing the police, he tried to escape from there but he surrounded him with assistance of his staff and when he questioned in the presence of mediators about his name and address. At first he gave prevaricate statement and finally he disclosed his name and address particulars and also confessed the commission of offence in the presence of mediators. A.1 took one bracelet and one gold chain from his pocket and handed over the same to him. He seized the same. A.1 lead them to Ramakanchiraju nagar, Devudumanyam puntha which is situated on
Pepakayalapalem, Karapa Road and he went to the bushes near by the side of the road and brought out a cover and took the blood stained clothes, curved knife, cutting plair from the cover and produced before them. On examination of blood stained clothes of the A.1 (1) blood stained snuff colour
T-shirt having a light cement colour cross boarder designs and having letters on it ‘abarcrombie & fitch’ under the back side collar and (2) A blood stained blue colour jean pant.
(f) Further on examination of the crime weapon it is a curved knife having blood stains the total length of the curved knife is measuring about 18 ½ inches and length of the blades measuring about 14 inches, the length of the wooden grip is measuring about 4 ½ inches, the width of the blade of the knife at the center point is measuring about 2 inches. He seized above items from the possession of the accused under cover of mediator report
dated 30.05.2019/Ex.P.6. MOs 1 to 4 are the said Curved knife, cutting plair,
blood stained blue colour jean pant, snuff colour T-shirt. During the course of confession, he has also seized pulsar motor bike bearing registration No. AP 05 EV 1450. MO.5 is the said pulsar motor bike bearing registration No. AP 05 EV 1450. During the course of confession, he called gold appraiser P.W.9 19 and got weighed the gold ornaments which are seized from A.1. MO.12 and 13 are the said gold bracelet and chain which were seized by him. He arrested the A.1.
(g) Further, as per the evidence collected so far, the role of A.2 is declared and also sections 120-B and 201 IPC are attracting against the accused 1 and 2 hence, he added the sections to the existing section and memo was filed in the Hon’ble Court. After completion of the confession of
A.1, he proceeded to Pepakayala Palem village along with mediators and staff and arrested A.1 visited the house of A.2 who is the wedded wife of the deceased. Then he takes her into custody with the help of women constables. He got recorded the confessional statement of A.2. She confessed the commission of offence as confessed by A.1. Then, he arrested
A.2 at 11.30 A.M. and forwarded A.1 and A.2 to the Judicial remand. He received postmortem certificate pertaining to the deceased and prepared letter of advise and sent the MOs seized from the accused, deceased to the
R.F.S.L. for analysis. Later on 03.06.2019, he secured the presence of P.W.9 and examined him and recorded his statement. The number of deceased mobile number is 8143148065. A.1 mobile number is 800294968. A.2 mobile number is 8499967280. As per call details of A.2 under Ex.X.1, it reveals that a call was sent from the deceased mobile number to mobile number of A.2 at 06:49:23 on 21.05.2019 and the duration of call is 28 seconds. As per call details of A.2 under Ex.X.1, it reveals that A.2 called the deceased at 07:23:57 on 21.05.2019 and the duration of call is 29 seconds.
(h) Further, on the same day to prove the conspiracy of A.1 and A.2 there are so many calls between A.1 and A.2 under Ex.X.1 on 21.05.2019.
There are 74 calls as per Ex.X.1 from A.2 to A.1 on 21.05.2019 which shows the conspiracy between A.1 and A.2. The duration of calls which are long duration also indicates the conspiracy between A.1 and A.2. On 23.06.2019, 20 he was transferred. He handed over the C.D. file to his successor L.W.23-A.
Murali Krishna for further investigation.
30. P.w.17 who verified the investigation and filed charge sheet his version is that he received C.D. file from P.W.16 on 02.07.2019 for further investigation. After receipt of C.D. file, he received Ex.P.10 R.F.S.L. report on 23.10.2019. He verified the investigation conducted by P.W.16 and found it on correct lines. As his predecessor completed the entire investigation including seizure and other formalities, he simply obtained Ex.P.10 and filed charge sheet against A.1 and A.2.
31.As seen from the record it reveals that there is no direct eye witness to the incident and that prosecution is depending upon the circumstantial evidence, motive for committing the murder of the deceased by the accused and last seen theory. It is well settled law that in cases where the evidence is of a circumstantial nature, the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be in the first instance be fully established and all the facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused. Again, the circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency and they should be such as to exclude every hypothesis but the one proposed to be proved. In other words, there must be a chain of evidence so far as complete not to leave any reasonable ground for a conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and it must be such as to show that within all human probability the act must have been done by the accused. The same was observed in
Hanumant Govind Nargundkar and Anr. V. State of Madhya Pradesh,
(AIR 1952 SC 343)
In the light of above principles with the various circumstances have to be analyzed with the evidence on record. Before such analysis it is necessary to discuss about the circumstances projected by the prosecution as follows:
21
I) The deceased Peketi Suryanarayana @ Suribabu is resident of
Neelayya Thota of Karapa village and his marriage was performed with A.2 on 15-5-2019 at the residence of A.2 at Pepakayalapalem village of Karapa
Mandal. On 21-5-2019 the deceased came to the house of P.Ws 1, 2 and 4 and went to his in laws house at about 4 p.m. P.W.1 came to know from P.W.2 that he received a phone call from the father of A.2 that the deceased did not come to the house even after 9 p.m., and that all they are contacted with the deceased by calling him with their mobiles and all of them noticed that his mobile No.8143148065 was switched off. Then all the brothers of the deceased and others searched for him at different places and could not trace him and came back and on the next day morning and they searched for him at Gollapalem road and they noticed the parking of bike belongs to deceased in the site of Siva Prasad. Then they searched surrounding the bike of the deceased. Then they found the dead body of the deceased in the fields of
Krishna Chaitanya covered with dry grass and found injuries on the top of his head and P.W.1 submitted a report to Karapa police on 22-5-2019 at about 10 or 11 a.m. Basing on which, the case was registered.
II) Coming to the other circumstances that P.Ws 6 to 8 saw the deceased with A.1 on 21-5-2019 in between 6 to 6-45 p.m., A.1 and deceased together going towards Patharlagadda via Penuguduru chitchatting standing near their motor cycles parking their vehicles near YSR statue. At about 8 p.m., P.W.6 noticing that A.1 alone was coming back to Karapa from
Gorripudi.
(III) There was conversation between deceased with A.2 duration at 6:49:23 on 21-5-2019 and A.2 with deceased duration at 7:23:57 on 21-5- 2019 and that there was several calls i.e., nearly 74 calls in between A.1 and
A.2 on 21-5-2019 which indicates conspiracy between A.1 and A.2 to murder the deceased.
22
IV) The information from P.Ws 6 to 8 to the police coupled with call details makes suspicion over the involvement of A.1 and A.2 in this crime.
V) The seizure of gold chain and bracelet from the possession of A.1 likewise blood stained clothes of A.1 from his possession likewise crime weapons from the possession of A.1 in the presence of mediators.
VI) The doctors evidence connecting the injuries noted on the dead body with the crime weapons.
VII) The motive for murdering the deceased by A.1 at the instance of
A.2 conspiracy in between them.
32.Now we have to see whether the prosecution is able to establish all the above said events linking chain to show that in all human probability the act must have been done by the accused only.
In order to prove the event No.1:
The evidence of P.Ws 1 to 5 regarding event No.1 remains unchallenged as there is no cross examination or even suggestions on that aspect. Hence, their evidence clearly establishes the happening of the said event.
In order to prove the event No.II
a) The evidence of P.Ws 6 to 8 is very crucial. According to P.W.6 on 21-5-2019 in between 6 to 7 p.m., he was going to Gorripudi from Karapa on his bike for purchasing material at Gorripudi and he saw A.1 and deceased
Suribabu were going on their respective bikes towards Patharlagadda road to a site; while he was coming back to Karapa from Gorripudi at 8 p.m., he saw
A.1 alone near pump set was going on his bike on which he asked him where is Suribabu. On which A.1 went away without answering any question on his bike hurriedly and he stated before the police that he got suspicion about
A.1.
23
b) Likewise P.W.7 also deposed that on 21-5-2019 at about 6-45 p.m., he was coming from Ramalingeswara Rice Mill after completing of his work to go to Karapa on a bullock cart and when he reached to Penuguduru bridge,
A.1 and A.2 standing near their motor cycle and talking with each other.
c) P.W.8 deposed that on 21-5-2019 around 6-30 p.m., he was going to
Patharlagadda via Penuguduru bridge, he noticed A.1 and Suribabu near YSR statue parking their vehicles near them and after supply of milk, he was coming to Penuguduru village when he reached to Patharlagadda road, he noticed the A.1 alone was coming on his bike from site speedily. After he came to know about the murder of the deceased on 22-5-2019, on which he informed the same to his father.
d) In cross examination of P.Ws 6 to 8, it was suggested to them due to darkness, they were unable to identify the deceased and A.1 at a long distance for which they denied the said question put to them and submitted that due to summer season it was not so dark, they were able to identify both of the said persons. No suggestion was put to the witnesses that they got enmity with the deceased and his family members, as such they are deposing false evidence. But it was suggested to them at the instance tutoring given by the police, they are deposing false evidence, for which they denied the said suggestion. Though P.Ws 6 to 8 were not able to say the vehicle numbers of the deceased and A.1 or the colour of shirts wore by them, but their evidence, they witnessing the A.1 and deceased last time
before the murder of the deceased about 6 to 7 p.m., on 21-5-2019 remains
unshaken. It is not suggested to them, they were not coming on that site and that it was not necessary to them to go towards that site on that day at that time. So their evidence is not liable to be discarded on any reason. The evidence of P.Ws 6 to 8 can be safely relied upon and their evidence proves the witnessing of A.1 and deceased together lastly just before the murder of the deceased. According to P.W.16 on 23-5-2019 he visited Karapa PS 24 secured the presence of P.Ws 6 to 8 and recorded their statements. Basing on their evidence, he got suspicion over A.1 and came to the conclusion that he might have murdered the deceased Suryanarayana and he found A.1 was absconding.
e) The version of prosecution, the murder of the deceased should be
before 8 p.m. on 21-5-2019( i.e., as per the doctor’s evidence and as per the
evidence of Pws 6 to 8 and as per the call details of deceased). After seen the deceased with A.1 before he found dead, the deceased not found with any other person than the accused. So, it can be safely said that A.1 murdered the deceased. The prosecution established A.1 murdered the deceased by establishing the last seen theory from the evidence of P.Ws 6 to 8.
33. Coming to the event No.III call details of A.1, A.2 and deceased.
a) In order to prove the call details of A.1, A.2 and deceased, the prosecution examined P.Ws 13 and 14 Nodal officer of Bharati Airtel Limited,
Hyderabad and Voda Fone Idea Limited besides marking Ex.X.1. They categorically deposed in their chief examination that they used to provide
C.D.Rs at request of S.Ps/Addl.S.Ps through mail as well as hard copy data for court submission along with the certificate u/sec.65 of Indian Evidence Act.
But in the present case, they submitted the call details of the mobile numbers as requested by the Add.S.P., East godavari District through mail.
Ex.X.1 is the hard copy of mail details. Sec.65-B(4) of Indian Evidence Act certificate is required and it is a condition precedent to the admissibility of evidence by way of electronic record and oral evidence in place of Sec.65-
B(4) of Indian Evidence Act cannot be relied upon. The same was observed in 2022 ACR 555 an electronic record by way of secondary evidence of electronic record inadmissible unless requirements of Sec.65-B are satisfied.
The same was observed in AIR 2015 SC 180. In view of the above legal 25 prepositions, the evidence of P.Ws 13 and 14 is not liable to be considered as their evidence is inadmissible evidence as they did not file Sec.65-B certificate along with the call details, marked under Ex.X.1. Though as per evidence on record it reveals that the Investigating Officer failed to seize the mobile phones belongs to deceased or A.1 and A.2 along with sim cards and not collected call details along with 65-B certificate and the evidence of P.Ws 13 and 14 is not in admissible evidence, but, P.W.16 Investigating Officer deposed in his chief examination that the deceased mobile number is 8143148065, A.1 mobile number is 800294968 and A.2 mobile number is 8499967280. As per call details of A.2, it reveals that a call was sent from the deceased mobile number to mobile number of A.2 at 06:49:23 on 21.05.2019 and the duration of call is 28 seconds. As per call details of A.2, it reveals that A.2 called the deceased at 07:23:57 on 21.05.2019 and the duration of call is 29 seconds. On the same day to prove the conspiracy of
A.1 and A.2 there are so many calls between A.1 and A.2 on 21.05.2019.
There are 74 calls from A.2 to A.1 on 21.05.2019 which shows the conspiracy between A.1 and A.2. The duration of calls which are long duration also indicates the conspiracy between A.1 and A.2. For which there is no specific suggestion to P.W.16 those numbers do not belongs to A.1, A.2 and deceased and that there is no such conversation between A.2 and deceased as A.1 and
A.2 as stated by him. Moreover A.1 and A.2 also did not specifically stated while their examination u/sec. 313 Cr.P.C that the mobile numbers stated by
P.W.16 are not belongs to them and there was no conversation among them, as stated by P.W.16. So it can be safely the said numbers as stated by P.W.16 belongs to the deceased, A.1 and A.2 respectively and there was conversation on the date of murder between A.1 and A.2 at least 74 calls with long duration also. So it indicates that the conspiracy between A.1 and
A.2 as well as instigation of A.2 to A.1. So prosecution is able to establish 26 through unchallenging evidence of P.W.16 about conspiracy between A.1 and
A.2 likewise abetment of A.2 to A.1 for murdering the deceased.
34.Coming to the event No.IV:-
The observations and findings in events 2 & 3 creates suspicion as A.1 in this crime.
35.Coming to the event No.V to prove the said factors,
(a) The evidence of P.W.9, 12 and P.W.16 Investigating Officer is crucial.
According to P.W.12 on 30-5-2019 at about 7 a.m., he received phone call from CI of Police, Karapa requesting him to act as mediator for arrest of accused and preparing for mediator nama. Then, he and police went to railway gate, Pepakayalapalem in a police Jeep. On seeing them one person was going on a bike tried to skulk away. On that with the help of his staff caught hold of him and interrogated him and on interrogation, the said person revealed his name as Karri Radhakrishna as A.1 and he is resident of
Karapa village and he confessed the commission of offence and he handed over one gold bracelet and one gold chain to the police and police people seized those gold items by putting in a cover and affixed slips and obtained their signatures. Police seized Pulsar bike from the possession of said Radha
Krishna under the cover of Mahajar Ex.P.6 which bears his signature and signature of L.W.19-P.Yesebu. Then on the same day at about 10 a.m., the accused lead them to near Devunimanyam, Toddy tree and brought knife, cutting plier and blood stained “T” shirt and pant. Police people seized those items under a cover of Ex.P.7 mahajar dated 30.05.2019 at 10.00 to 11.00 AM which bears his signature. MO.1 is the curved Knife. MO.2 is the cutting plier. MO.3 is the blood stained blue colour jean pant. MO.4 is the snuff colour “T” shirt having light cement colour cross border designs. MO.5 is the pulsar motor bike bearing registration No. AP 05 EV 1450. Again they rushed to house of A.2 situated at Karapa Village at about 11.30 A.M. Police interrogated A.2 she revealed her name and address particulars and etc., 27 and she confessed the commission of offence. Police people arrested A.2 in their presence and he identified A.1 and A.2 who were present and standing
in the Court Hall as accused.
(b) According to P.W.9 on 30.05.2019 at about 09.00 A.M., while he was in his shop, Police constable of Karapa P.S. came to his shop and asked him to come to Railway gate, Karapa with weighing machine as they arrested one accused and seized gold from him for weighing the gold. Accordingly, he accompanied the Constable along with weighing machine and reached the
Railway Gate, Kapara. Inspector of police, Constable, A.1 who is standing the Court hall and others were present. He weighed gold bracelet and gold chain and he found bracelet is weighing 20.400 gms and chain is 16.600 gms. Accordingly, he gave chits to the police.
(c)Their evidence is corroborating with the evidence of P.W1.6 on all aspects regarding the seizure of M.Os 1 to 5 from the possession of A.1 and also contents of seizure under Ex.P.6 Mahazar. Except suggestions nothing was elicited from their cross examination to discredit their testimony or to destroy the case of the prosecution. Hence, it can be safely said that the prosecution is able to establish the seizure of crime weapons i.e., M.O.1 curved knife, M.O.2 cutting plier from the possession of A.1 and also the blood stain clothes of accused using at the time of offence which are marked as M.Os 4 and 5. It is not suggested to P.Ws that M.Os 3 to 5 are not the clothes of A.1 and they were not with blood stains of human body and that the accused did not wore the said clothes at the time of offence and that he did not use the M.Os 1 and 2 for murdering the deceased.
(d) Coming to the examination of A.1 u/sec.313 regarding the evidence of P.w.9 and 12 he deposed that it is false and he did not specifically deny that those clothes are not belongs to him and that he did not wore the said clothes etc etc., allegedly at the time of committing the offence. There is no necessity to P.W.9 and 12 to depose false evidence against the A.1 as no 28 enmity was suggested to him by the counsel for A.1 between them and A.1.
Hence, I am of the view that there are no reasons to discard their evidence, thus I am of the view that their evidence is trust worthy and further proves the seizure of M.Os 1 to 5 from the possession of the A.1 under the cover of
Ex.P.6 which connect A.1 with this crime.
36. Coming to the event No.VI is that, to prove this event, the evidence of P.W.11 who conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased is crucial his evidence speaks that he found chop wound injuries and multiple abrasions over the dead body of the deceased as noted in
Ex.P.5 PM report. The learned counsel for A.1 submitted that it is the duty of prosecution to see that the alleged weapon of the offence, if available is shown to the medical witness and his opinion invited as to whether all or any of the injuries on the victim could be caused with that weapon. Failure to do so may sometimes, cause aberration in the course of justice for that he relied upon a decision reported in AIR 1976 Supreme Court 2423. The learned counsel for A.1 further submitted that the prosecution failed to show the crime weapon to the doctor and to ask whether the injuries noted in the
Ex.P.5 are possible with the crime weapon i.e., M.Os 1 and 2 or not. Though it may be true, but P.W.16 admitted that he did not ask P.W.11 that the injuries noted in Ex.P.5 are possible due to M.Os 1 and 2, but he deposed that he got very much knowledge that as he has no doubt causing injuries noted in Ex.P.5 are possible with M.Os 1 and 2. Moreover, P.W.11 also denied the suggestion put to him by the counsel for A.1 that due to hack by the crime weapon it is not possible to sustain chop wound. He also denied the suggestion put to him by the counsel for A.1 that the injuries noticed in
Ex.P.5 are possible due to sudden hit of the head to a pole while riding the motor cycle. Though in Ex.P.5 it was mentioned that the dead body is female dead body, but he denied the suggestion that he did not conduct the Post
Mortem on Peketi Suribabu as per Ex.P.5 and that his observation pertains to 29 one female dead body. Likewise P.W.11 further deposed that it is mentioned in Ex.P.5 that the PM examination was concluded at 11-30 p.m., on 23-5- 2019, but he deposed that it is due to typographical mistake instead of mentioning 11-30 a.m., it is mentioned as 11-30 p.m. He categorically further deposed that Sl.No.2 and 4 of internal injuries are not possible with a sharp edged weapon. So as per the evidence on record it appears that the injuries noted in Ex.P.5 are possible with M.O.1 and the injuries noted by
P.W.11 in Ex.P.5 are also reflects identical with inquest report. Though some of the injuries were not tallied with inquest report and Ex.P.5 PM Certificate, but inquest dars and blood relatives are not experts in medical terminology and they may not observed all the injuries as noted in Ex.P.5. Coloum No.10 of Ex.P.4 it is mentioned that the injuries was caused with sharp edged knife or weapon like rod so it also probablising that the injury noted under Ex.P.5 are possible with M.O.1. The evidence of P.W.11 is corroborating with the other evidence available on record on all aspects. Thus, prosecution is able to establish their event also.
37. Coming to the event No.VII that, the version of P.Ws 1 to 5 subsequently they came to know that there is illegal intimacy between A.1 and A.2 and that they conspired together and murder the deceased
Suribabu. There is no specific suggestion to P.Ws 1 to 4 denying that they did not come to know that there is illegal intimacy between A.1 and A.2 and that there is no conspiracy between A.1 and A.2 and they did not together murdered the deceased Suribabu. If really there was no illegal intimacy between A.1 and A.2 and no conspiracy as alleged by prosecution A.2 being the wife of the deceased should be present at the time of inquest. But, A.2 stated during her examination u/sec.313Cr.P.C regarding inquest as deposed by P.W.10 under question No.14 that she does not know about the inquest details as spoken by P.W.10. Any ordinary prudent person expects the 30 presence of a wife on the death of her husband on 7 or 8th day of her marriage at the time of inquest with the dead body with deep sorrow, if really she has no illegal intimacy with A.1 and she had deep love with her husband deceased Suribabu. The absence of A.2 at the time of inquest over the dead body of the deceased probablising that there is an illegal intimacy/ conspiracy/instigation in between A.1 and A.2 in causing murder of the deceased. Moreover, the counsel for A.1 and A.2 did not put any suggestions to P.Ws about any motive to P.W.1 for falsely implicating them in this crime.
Moreover it is also not the case of the defence that the accused was murdered by somebody else who got enmity between the deceased or the deceased died due to accident etc., etc. Moreover as per the evidence of mother of deceased it makes clear that the deceased had no enmity with his colleagues or others. So all the above mentioned circumstances go to establish that the prosecution is able to prove the motive to A.1 and A.2 in committing the offence.
38. All the above mentioned events establishing due to illegal intimacy between A.1 and A.2, A.1 hacked the deceased with M.O.1 on the top of his head from his back side with an intention and knowledge to kill him and also committed theft of gold chain and bracelet from the dead body of the deceased with the help of M.O.2. Thus prosecution is able to establish that A1. & A.2 committed offence punishable u/sec.302 of IPC.
The unchallenged evidence of P.Ws 1 to 4 that they found the dead body of the deceased in the fields of Krishna Chaitanya covered with dry grass further established that A1 and A.2 committed offence punishable u/sec.201 of IPC. Accordingly, A.1 and A.2 are found guilty for the offences u/sec.302 and 201 of IPC, and they are convicted for the said offences.
31
39.In the result, the A.1 and A.2 are found guilty for the charge under Section 302 and 201 of IPC and accordingly, they are convicted under Sec.235 (2) of Cr.P.C.
Dictated to the Stenographer (Grade-I), transcribed by her, corrected
and pronounced by me in the open court this the 11 th day of November 2022.
SD/-P.Kamala Devi
IV ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE,
KAKINADA.
38.The A.1 and A.2 are present, and when they are questioned with regard to the quantum of sentence to be imposed on them, A.1 stated that he is not having father and having two children, wife and mother are depending upon him, and he pleaded to show mercy on him.
A.2 stated that nothing to say.
39.By considering the offences with which the A.1 and A.2 have been charged and for the offences which are proved against them are under
Sec.302 and 201 of Indian Penal Code, and as the alleged offence u/sec.302 of IPC committed by the A.1 and A.2 is grave in nature and it being the sensational murder case in the surrounding village of Pepakayalapalem and
Karapa and that keeping the welfare of society at large and to eradicate this type of offences by any person in future. I am of the view that this is not a fit case to take a lenient view and to grant mercy to the A.1 and A.2.
40.In the result, the A.1 and A.2 are convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous Imprisonment for life each for the offence u/sec.302
of IPC, and also sentenced to pay fine of Rs.5000/- each. In default
of payment of fine amount, they shall suffer simple imprisonment
for a period of 3 months each.
32
Further, A.1 and A.2 are convicted and sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 3 years each for the
offence u/sec.201 of IPC, and also sentenced to pay fine of Rs.5000/-
each. In default of payment of fine amount, they shall suffer simple
imprisonment for a period of 3 months each. All the sentences
passed against A.1 and A.2 in the case shall run concurrently. The remand period of A.1 from 30-5-2019 to 8-8-2019, A.2 from 30-5-2019 to 12- 7-2019 shall be given set off under Sec.428 Cr.P.C. M.O.5 shall be confiscated to the state after expiry of appeal time. M.Os.6 to 13 were already given to P.W.1 for interim custody as per the orders in Crl.M.P.No. 243
dt:25-7-2022 shall continue the custody after expiry of appeal time. M.Os.1
to 4 and M.Os 14 to 18 shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time. The unmarked property, if any shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal time.
A.1 and A.2 apprised of their right to file appeal before the Hon’ble
Appellate court on the judgment of this court, and they are also apprised of their right to seek legal aid for their appeal before the Hon’ble Appellate court.
Dictated to the stenographer Gr-I transcribed by her, corrected
and pronounced by me, in the open court this the 11 th day of
November, 2022.
Sd/-P.Kamala Devi
IV ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE,
KAKINADA.
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses examined.
No. of witnesses examined for prosecution:
P.W.1Peketi Sathibabu @ Gandhi P.W.2Peketi Krishna P.W.3Peketi Subrahmanyam P.W.4Peketi Satyavathi P.W.5Medisetti Lova Raju P.W.6Medisetti Satyanarayana P.W.7Kalavala Ravi Kumar P.W.8Bandaru Veera Prasad alias Vara Prasad P.W.9Golthi Sathish Kumar P.W.10Pulapakura Kondala Rao 33
P.W.11Dr. D. Durga Prasad P.W.12Kunche Nagaraju P.W.13B.C. Ramayya P.W.14A.V.Krishna Kumar Naidu P.W.15G. Appala Raju, S.I. of Police. P.W.16P. Eswarudu P.W.17A. Murali Krishna No. of witnesses examined for defence:None
No. of exhibits marked for Prosecution:
Ex.P.1Complaint given by P.W.1. Ex.P.2Photographs eight in number along with C.D. Ex.P.3Scene observation cum seizure nama Ex.P.4inquest report Ex.P.5Post mortem report Ex.P.6Seizure mahajar of Bracelet, gold chain and Pulsar bike Ex.P.7Mahajar dated 30.05.2019 at 10.00 to 11.00 AM Ex.P.8F.I.R. Ex.P.9rough sketch Ex.P.10R.F.S.L. report.
Ex.X.1Hard copy of said mail details. (marked subject to objection).
No. of documents marked for defence: Nil.
Material objects marked:
M.O.1curved Knife M.O.2cutting plier M.O.3blood stained blue colour jean pant M.O.4snuff colour “T” shirt having light cement colour cross border designs M.O.5pulsar motor bike bearing registration No.
AP 05 EV 1450 M.O.6gold ring which bears letter ’H’ M.O.7gold ring which bears letter ’S’ M.O.8gold ring studded with Saibaba M.O.9Silver ring M.O.10Wrist watch M.O.11Hero Honda Motor cycle bearing No. 0631. M.O.12Gold bracelet M.O.13Gold Chain M.O.14blood stained earth and its controlled earth M.O.15Chappels M.O.16Cement colour Full hands shirt having black colour strips M.O.17Blue colour Jean pant M.O.18Black dixcy scot company underwear of the deceased
Sd/-P.Kamala Devi
IV Addl. Sessions Judge Kakinada 34