Allowed

Kamparaju Rajesh Kumar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC5 Mar 2024CRLA/956/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeals against conviction for murder for gain and robbery of a woman at her home. The court found no direct evidence; the key panch witness was vague and unreliable, and fingerprint evidence was defective. Conviction under Sections 396, 149 and 120-B IPC set aside; all appellants acquitted.

What did the court decide?

Convictions and sentences of A.1 to A.8 set aside; accused set at liberty if not required elsewhere.

Kamparaju Rajesh Kumar Vs The State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

APHC010427222019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

[3474]

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI

¶7

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 956/2019

¶8

Between:

¶9

Kamparaju Rajesh Kumar and Others ...APELLANT(S) AND

¶10

The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPODENT

¶11

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 159/2020

¶12

Between:

¶13

A Parameswar Babu and Others ...APELLANT(S)

¶14

AND

¶15

The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPODENT

¶16

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 385/2020

¶17

Between: Ch Ravindra Reddy

¶18

...APELLANT

¶19

AND

¶20

The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPODENT Counsel for the Apellants:

¶21

1. Sri H. Prahalad Reddy

¶22

2. Sri T. Nagarjuna Reddy,

¶23

3. Mrs. Vasundhara Reddy

¶24

4. Sri T.S.Anirudh Reddy

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent:

¶26

1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

¶27

The Court made the following:

¶28

¶29

KSR, J & BVLNV, J Crl.A.Nos.956 of 2019, 159 & 385 of 2020

¶30

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURESH REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI

¶31

CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos.956 of 2019, 159 and 385 of 2020

¶32

COMMON JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice K. Suresh Reddy)

¶33

As the three criminal appeals arise out of the same judgment i.e., S.C.No.169 of 2014, dated 10.12.2019 on the file of the Court of VIII Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge for the trial of Offences against Women, Nellore, they are being disposed of by way of this common judgment.

¶34

Accused Nos.3, 5, 7 and A.8 are the appellants in Crl.A.No.956 of 2019, A.2, A.4 and A.6 are the appellants in Crl.A.No.159 of 2020 and A.1 is the appellant in Crl.A.No.385 of 2020. They were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge under three charges i.e., first charge under Section 396 IPC read with 149 IPC against A.2, A.6, A.7 and A.8, second charge under Section 396 IPC against A.3 to A.5 and the third charge is under Section 120-B IPC against A.1 to A.8.

¶35

The substance of the charges is that, on 23.12.2012, A.1 and A.2 conspired with A.3 to A.8 and decided to commit murder for gain and identified the family of one Vijayamma (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) at Kavali town. As per their conspiracy, A.3 to A.5 caused the death of the deceased in her house and committed theft of gold jewellery on the body of the deceased, thereby committed offences

¶36

¶37

KSR, J & BVLNV, J Crl.A.Nos.956 of 2019, 159 & 385 of 2020

¶38

punishable under Sections 395, 396 read with 149 IPC and Section 120-B IPC.

¶39

Case of the prosecution as stated by the prosecution witnesses is as follows:

¶40

i) All the accused conspired together and decided to commit murder for gain and identified the family of the deceased. PW.1 is the brother, PW.2 is the husband and PW.3 is the son of the deceased. A.1 is a tenant of the deceased and PW.2. He decided to kill the deceased and rob her belongings and informed the same to A.2. In terms of their conspiracy, both A.1 and A.2 engaged the services of A.3 to A.8 for committing the offence by using a vehicle bearing registration No. AP 21 TV 6445.

¶41

ii) On 28.12.2012, A.2 to A.6 stayed in a lodge belonging to PW.2. A.1 kept A.7 along with A.2 to A.6 to look after their needs. While so, at about 10.30 a.m., on 29.12.2012, A.1 took PW.2 out of his house in the car of PW.2 on the pretext of paying house rent. A.1 roamed along with PW.2 till 12.30 p.m. In the meanwhile, as per their plan, A.2 to A.8 went to the house of PW.2 and A.3 to A.5 knocked the door. When the deceased opened the door, immediately, A.3 to A.5 pounced upon the deceased and killed her by closing mouth and nose. Thereafter, having taken all the ornaments on the body of the deceased, they left the place. At about 12.30 noon, PW.2 returned home and found the deceased lying dead. He observed plaster to her mouth and nose and

¶42

¶43

KSR, J & BVLNV, J Crl.A.Nos.956 of 2019, 159 & 385 of 2020

¶44

tied her hands with plastic rope. Immediately, he raised cries. On hearing the cries of PW.2, PWs.4 and 5 rushed to the house of PW.2. Of course, PWs.4 and 5 did not support the prosecution case.

¶45

iii) Having received the telephone call from PW.2, PW.1 brother of the deceased came to the house at about 2 p.m. When PW.1 enquired, PW.2 informed him that the deceased was murdered and her gold jewellery was stolen. Thereafter, PW.1 went to the police station and gave report Ex.P.1.

¶46

iv) At about 5.00 p.m., on the same day, PW.17- Sub-Inspector of Police, I Town PS, Kavali, received the written report from PW.1 and registered it as Cr.No.142 of 2012 for the offences under Sections 302, 454 and 380 IPC. Ex.P.22 is the copy of the FIR. Having received the information, the Inspector of Police, Kavali Rural Police Station, took up further investigation. Immediately, he proceeded to the scene of offence, secured the presence of PWs.10 and 12 and prepared observation report Ex.P.21. He also prepared sough sketch Ex.P.20 at the scene of offence. He seized MOs.13 to 20 at the scene of offence. He also got the scene photographed through PW.8 and the photographs were marked as Ex.P.5. He recorded the statements of PWs.1 and 2 on 30.12.2012. He held inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of PW.9 and another. Ex.P.16 is the inquest report. He recorded the statements of PWs.4 to 6 and others at the time of inquest. Further investigation was taken over by PW.18.

¶47

¶48

KSR, J & BVLNV, J Crl.A.Nos.956 of 2019, 159 & 385 of 2020

¶49

v) On 08.01.2013, on credible information, PW.18 secured the presence of PW.11 and another, proceeded to APSRTC bus stand, Kavali at about 8.30 a.m. On seeing the police, when A.1 and A.7 tried to run away, PW.18 apprehended them with the help of his staff. He interrogated A.1 and A.7 separately and recorded their confessional statement. In pursuance of their confession, PW.18 seized a gold chain MO.3 from A.1, one gold ring MO.6 from A.7 and he seized MOs.3 and 6 under a cover of mahazarnama Ex.P.12 in the presence of PWs.11 and another. On further confession of A.1 and A.7, PW.18 along with his staff and mediators reached Throvagunta Centre, Ongole at about 11.30 a.m. on the same day and on seeing the police, A.2 to A.6 and A.8 tried to escape from the scene, PW.18 with the help of his staff, arrested A.2 to A.6 and A.8 and interrogated them separately. He seized one plain gold bangle from A.2, one red stone studded gold bangle and one plain gold bangle from A.3, one red stone studded bangle and one plain gold bangle from A.4, one plain gold bangle from A.5, one red stone gold ring from A.6 and white stone gold ring from A.8. He seized them under a cover of mediators report Ex.P.10. They were marked as MOs.1 to 6. On the same day, PW.18 visited Vijaya Towers Lodge and seized five sheets of lodge register under Ex.P.23. As per the evidence of PW.18, A.2 took room No.304 and A.3 took room No.303 in the said lodge. Ex.P.24 are the receipts of Vijaya Towers Lodge register. He seized Exs.P.23 and 24 under a cover of mediators report Ex.P.11 in the presence of PW.11 and

¶50

¶51

KSR, J & BVLNV, J Crl.A.Nos.956 of 2019, 159 & 385 of 2020

¶52

another. Then, he arrested all the accused, who were remanded to judicial custody on the next day. He altered the section of law and added Sections 395, 396 read with 120 IPC. Ex.P.24 is the copy of the altered FIR.

¶53

vi) On 09.01.2013 at about 9.00 a.m., PW.18 secured the presence of PW.11 and another, conducted test identification parade of the property through PWs.1 and 2. On 21.01.2013, he secured the police custody of A.3 and on confession of A.3, he recovered a suit case from a bush near Telugu Ganga canal. He found MOs.7 to 9 in the said suit case. He also found MO.10 voter ID of PW.2, Xerox copy of a portion of sale deed MO.12 and seized the same under Ex.P.26 mediators report. After receipt of the RFSL report Ex.P.27, PW.18 filed the charge sheet.

¶54

In support of its case, the prosecution examined PWs.1 to 18 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.26, apart from exhibiting MOs.1 to 20. When the accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., they denied the incriminating material found against them in the prosecution witnesses, however, they did not choose to examine any witness in defence.

¶55

Relying on the evidence of PWs.1 and 2, coupled with the evidence of PWs.11, 13 and 14, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nellore, convicted A.1 for the offence under Section 120-B and 396 IPC and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/-, in default to pay fine, to suffer

¶56

¶57

KSR, J & BVLNV, J Crl.A.Nos.956 of 2019, 159 & 385 of 2020

¶58

simple imprisonment for a period of one month. He further convicted A.2 to A.7 for the offence punishable under Section 120-B read with 396 IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default to pay fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month. He further convicted A.3 to A.5 for the offence punishable under Section 396 IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default to pay fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence. He further convicted A.2, A.6 and A.7 for the offence punishable under 396 read with 149 IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default to pay fine to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month. He further convicted A.8 for the offence under Section 120-B read with 396 IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to pay a fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month. He further convicted A.8 for the offence under Section 396 read with 149 IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to pay a fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month. All the above sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

¶59

¶60

KSR, J & BVLNV, J Crl.A.Nos.956 of 2019, 159 & 385 of 2020

¶61

Heard Sri H. Prahladha Reddy, learned counsel appearing for A.2, A.4, A.7 and A.1 who are the appellants in Crl.A.No.159 of 2020, Crl.A.No.956 of 2019 and Crl.A.No.385 of 2020, Sri T. Nagarjuna Reddy, learned counsel appearing for A.3 and A.6, who are the appellants in Crl.A.No.956 of 2019 and 159 of 2020, Mrs. Vasundhara Reddy, learned counsel appearing for A.5, who is the appellant in Crl.A.No.956 of 2019, Sri T. Pradhyumna Kumar Reddy, learned senior counsel, representing Sri T.Anirudh Reddy appearing for A.8 , who is the appellant in Crl.A.No.956 of 2019 and Sri S. Dushyantha Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. Perused the entire material on record.

¶62

As seen from the material on record, there is no direct evidence to the alleged incident. PW.1 is the brother, PW.2 is the husband and PW.3 is the son of the deceased. Their evidence only show that on 29.12.2012 at about 12.30 p.m., they found the deceased lying dead in her house. They found plaster on the mouth and nose of the deceased and her hands were tied with plastic rope. It is also the case of the prosecution that PWs.1 and 2 found missing gold ornaments on the dead body of the deceased. So far as PWs.4 and 5 are concerned, on hearing the cries of PW.2, they rushed to the house of PW.2, but they did not support the prosecution case. The only evidence available on record in the instant case is the arrest and seizure of the gold jewellery.

¶63

¶64

KSR, J & BVLNV, J Crl.A.Nos.956 of 2019, 159 & 385 of 2020

¶65

PW.11 who is working as Village Revenue Officer, Brahmanakraka village of Jaladanki Mandal, was examined to speak to the arrest of the accused and recovery of gold ornaments from them. According to him, he acted as a mediator for the arrest of the accused and seizure of gold ornaments. He is the main witness in the present case. According to PW.11, on 08.01.2013 PW.18 called him to the police station. Then, he along with PW.18 and others proceeded to Kavali bus stand at about 8.30 a.m., where PW.18 arrested A.1 and A.7. On the same day at about 11.30 a.m., PW.18 arrested the remaining accused in a different place. In his evidence, PW.11 categorically stated that he did not know the contents of mahazarnama Ex.P.9 that was drafted by the police at the scene, where A.1 and A.7 were apprehended. He also stated in his chief examination that one gold chain and something else were seized from their possession. He also stated that he affixed his signature on Ex.P.9 mahazarnama . He also stated in his evidence that six persons were arrested at Ongole bye-pass road and some bangles were recovered from their possession. He did not state any details of the accused, who were arrested and what are the articles that were recovered from their possession. He simply stated that PW.18 arrested six persons and recovered some bangles from their possession. Except the said vague statement, PW.11 did not say anything in his evidence. In his cross-examination PW.11 has stated that he acted as a panch witness in several cases.

¶66

¶67

KSR, J & BVLNV, J Crl.A.Nos.956 of 2019, 159 & 385 of 2020

¶68

Be that as it may, to prove the arrest of the accused and recovery of gold ornaments from them, the prosecution mainly relied on the evidence of PW.11, who is a crucial witness, but he did not state any particulars in his evidence about the articles that were seized from the possession of A.1 to A.8. On the other hand, he also admitted in the cross-examination that he acted as a panch witness in several cases. As such the evidence of PW.11 does not inspire confidence of this Court.

¶69

The other evidence relied upon by the prosecution is that of PW.14, who is the Inspector of Police, Finger Print Expert. His evidence also is not helpful to the prosecution, as he did not state in his evidence that as to how he received the admitted signatures of the accused. Even PW.18 also did not state in his evidence that he obtained thumb impressions of the accused. As such, the evidence of PW.14 is also not helpful to the prosecution case.

¶70

The other mediator, who was examined as PW.15, did not support the prosecution case. Except the above evidence, the prosecution has not adduced any other evidence with regard to arrest of the accused and seizure of the gold ornaments. As such, this Court is not inclined to accept the prosecution version, as there is no cogent and convincing evidence in support of their case.

¶71

¶72

KSR, J & BVLNV, J Crl.A.Nos.956 of 2019, 159 & 385 of 2020

¶73

For the aforesaid reasons, we feel that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of A.1 to A.8 beyond reasonable doubt and hence, all the accused are entitled for acquittal.

¶74

Accordingly, all the three criminal appeals are allowed. The conviction and sentence recorded against appellants/A.1 to A.8 vide judgment dated 10.12.2019 in S.C.No.169 of 2014 on the file of the Court of III Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge for trial of offences against Women, Nellore, for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B read with 396 IPC against A.1, under Sections 120-B read with 396 IPC against A.2 to A.8, under Section 396 IPC against A.3 to A.5 under Sections 396 read with 149 IPC against A.2, A.6 to A.8, are set aside. Consequently, accused shall be set at liberty forthwith, if they are not required in any other case or crime.

¶75

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in these three criminal appeals, shall stand closed.

¶76

_____________________ JUSTICE K. SURESH REDDY_

¶77

_________________________ JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI_

¶78

Date: 06.03.2024 BSS

¶79

¶80

KSR, J & BVLNV, J Crl.A.Nos.956 of 2019, 159 & 385 of 2020

¶81

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURESH REDDY

¶82

AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI

¶83

CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos.956 of 2019, 159 and 385 of 2020

¶84

(per Hon’ble Sri Justice K. Suresh Reddy)

¶85

¶86

Date: 06.03.2024

¶87

BSS

Kamparaju Rajesh Kumar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamparaju Rajesh Kumar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Boya Chilakala Ramudu, Kurnool Dist. and 2 Othrs Vs P.P., Hyd

M.Laxmirajyam and Anr. Vs the State of A.P.

Moganti Siva Kameswara Rao, W.G.Dt., Vs the State of Ap., Rep Pp.

A Parameswar Babu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Ch Ravindra Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Shaik Kasim Basha, Kurnool Dt and Anr., Vs the State of Ap., Rep Pp.