Criminal Appeal by a convicted murderer challenging his life sentence. The High Court upheld the conviction, rejecting the plea that the incident resulted from a quarrel that should reduce the offence's gravity.
Criminal Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence of life imprisonment affirmed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR
AND
HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1084 of 2011
JUDGMENT : (per Hon’ble Sri Justice C.Praveen Kumar)
The sole accused in Sessions Case No. 109 of 2011 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, Hindupur is the appellant herein. He was tried under Section 302 IPC for causing the death of his sister-in-law by name, Pitta Pullamma by hacking her with an axe on her left side of the neck on 01.12.2000. Vide judgment dated 12th May, 2011, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the accused and sentenced him to suffer “ imprisonment for life” .
PW1 is the daughter-in-law of the deceased, while PW2 is the son of the deceased. PWs 3 and 4 are the sons-in-law of the deceased, and PW5 is a resident of Dharmavaram village. On the date of incident, i.e., 01.12.2010, at about 1.30 p.m., when the deceased was standing on the cement road in front of the house of the deceased, the accused hacked her with an axe on her left side of the neck, resulting in instant death. PW1 further deposed that the accused used to quarrel with the deceased for money for
2
having sold the property at Nagalur village, and when the deceased did not reply, he hacked her with an axe on the date of incident, causing her death. PWs 2 to 5 also deposed that on the date of the incident, they noticed the accused creating galata in front of the house of PW1 for want of money, and subsequently, the accused hacking the deceased with an axe on the left side of her neck, causing instant death.
3
4
witnesses have been tutored by the prosecution to speak about the incident. He further contends that since the version of all the witnesses is that there was a galata between the accused and the deceased and the incident occurred as a result of the said galata, the accused cannot be convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC and the nature of offence can be scaled down.
PW1 deposed as under:
“ The deceased my mother in law was standing on a cement road in front of our house. The accused hacked her with an axe on her left side neck resulting instant death. My mother in law sustained severe bleeding injury and died on the spot. L.W.2 to 9 who were present there, witnessed the incident. The accused used to quarrel with my mother in law for the money for having sold the property at Nagalur village. In this connection the accused demanded my mother in law to pay amount for having sold the property in Nagalur village. When my deceased mother in law did not give reply the accused hacked her with an axe resulting her instant death. She sustained bleeding injury because of hacking injury. She fell down on the cement road. The accused after having hacked my mother in law with an
5
axe ran away from that place with an axe used by the accused in the commission of offence.”
12. The evidence of PW2 reads as follows:
“ The accused is my junior paternal uncle. My mother was killed by accused 6 months ago on one day. The accused demanding my mother for a share in the property sold in the village. My mother refused to give any share to the accused. The accused was also staying in the house along with my mother. The accused killed my mother with Axe. On the date of the incident I came to my deceased mother’s house along with L.W.2 my sister, L.W.4 my brother in law and L.W.5 my husband. The accused hacked my mother at about 2-00 p.m. on her left side neck resulting her instant death in front of her house. After murdering the accused, he ran away along with Axe M.O.4 used by him in the commission of offence. The accused was sole responsible for the murder of my mother.”
13. PW3 deposed as under:
“ The accused is brother of my father in law. My mother in law was killed on 1-12-2010 at about 2-00 p.m. in Dharmavaram. On that day I came to the house of my mother in law along with my family members and family members of L.W.5 my co brother to see my mother in law. The accused started galata with my mother in law for want of money. At that time we were taking lunch. Immediately the accused hacked my mother in law with Axe on her left side neck in front of the deceased house resulting her instant death. The accused was sole responsible for the death of my mother in law. The accused killed my mother in law due to property disputes. After killing my mother in law the accused left the place along with Axe used by him in the commission of offence. M.O.4 is the Axe used by the accused in the commission of offence.”
14. The evidence of PW4 reads as under:
6
“ The accused who is the brother of my father in law. The incident had happened on 1-12-10 at about 2-00 p.m. in front of the deceased house, Dharmavaram. At that time I was present in the house of deceased. On that I came to the house of my mother in law along with my family members and members of my co-brother to see my mother in law. The accused started galata with my mother in law for want of money. At that time we were taking lunch. Immediately the accused hacked my mother in law with Axe on her left side neck in front of the deceased house resulting her instant death. The accused was sole responsible for the death of my mother in law. The accused killed my mother in law due to property disputes. After killing my mother in law the accused left the place along with Axe used by him in the commission of offence. M.O.4 is the Axe used by the accused in commission of offence.”
15. PW5 deposed as under:
“ On the date of incident I along with LW.7 my wife were proceeding from my house at 2-00 p.m. I found the accused making galata on the road in front of the house of the deceased and hacked the deceased with an Axe on her left side neck, resulting her instant death. M.O.4 is the Axe used by the accused in the commission of offence. On seeing me and LW.7 my wife and others the accused ran away along with M.O.4 Axe used by him in the commission of offence. The accused killed the deceased due to money disputes.”
7
8
9
_________________________
JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR
________________________________
JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI
03.01.2018
DMG
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the conviction under Section 302 IPC warrants interference.
Whether the nature of the offence should be scaled down given the alleged 'galata' or quarrel.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
The Accused
State
C. Praveen Kumar
Kongara Vijaya Lakshmi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
