Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Thatipamula Venkateswara Rao, vs The State Of Ap Rep By Its Pp Hyd., on 11 March, 2022
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY
CRL.R.C.1594 OF 2007
ORDER:-
Questioning the judgment, dated 15-11-2007, passed by
the learned IX Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC),
Guntur in C.A.No.27 of 2005, the petitioner/Accused No.1 filed
the present Criminal Revision Case.
Heard Sri K.Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Sri Soora Venkata Sainath, learned Special Assistant Public
Prosecutor.
The petitioner who is Accused No.1 along with another
accused was tried by the learned III Additional Sessions
Judge(FTC), Guntur in S.C.No.345 of 2002 for the offence
punishable under Sections. 307 and 324 r/w.34 IPC.
The case of the prosecution is that the accused and
injured/defacto complainant belong to Thulluru Village and are
supporters of rival political parties. Due to political disputes in an
earlier occasion, the accused picked up a quarrel with one
Ch.Thirupathaiah who is the brother of the defacto complainant
and the said incident was compromised. While the mater stood
thus, on 09-08-2001 at 9.00 P.M when the defacto complainant-
Ch.Edukondalu was going to his house situated at Thullur, the
accused attacked Pw.1 and inflicted bodily injuries. Later, the
injured was shifted to the Government Hospital for treatment.
The Station House Officer concerned recorded the statement of
the injured and registered as a case in Cr.No.69 of 2001 of
Thullu Police Station under Section 307 r/w.34 IPC and after
completion of investigation, police filed the charge sheet.
2
The prosecution examined Pws.1 to 8 and marked
Exs.P-1 to P-11 besides Mo.1. On behalf of the accused, no oral
or documentary evidence was adduced.
After completion of trial, the learned trial judge convicted
the Accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offence punishable under
Section 324 r/w.34 IPC and sentenced them to suffer simple
imprisonment for a period of one year and also sentenced to pay
a fine of Rs.1000/- each in default to suffer simple imprisonment
for two months. Aggrieved by the same, A-1 and A-2 preferred
Criminal Appeal i.e., C.A.No.27 of 2005 before the IX Additional
Sessions Judge, Guntur. The learned appellate judge after
evaluating the entire evidence on record, dismissed the appeal
by confirming the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial
court. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the petitioner, who is
Accused No.1 alone filed the present Criminal Revision Case.
This court has perused the entire evidence on record. The
incident that was occurred on 09-08-2001 is an outcome of a
dispute with regard to political rivalry. The evidence of Pw.1 is
crystal clear that the accused attacked Pw.1 and thereby caused
bodily injuries; that the evidence of Pw.2 goes to show that he
witnessed the incident while the accused attacking Pw.1; further
the evidence of Pw.3 who is the circumstantial witness also goes
to show that on the date of alleged incident, he observed the
accused as well as Pw.1 at the scene of offence. In that view of
the matter, there are no grounds to interfere with the conviction
recorded by both the courts. However, as the incident took place
3
nearly 21 years back, this court is inclined to take a lenient view
with regard to sentence of imprisonment alone.
In that view of the matter, the present Criminal Revision
Case is dismissed confirming the conviction recorded by both the
courts. However, the sentence of imprisonment awarded under
Section 324 r/w 34 IPC is reduced from one year to period
already undergone by maintaining the fine amount.
Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed
in consequence.
__________________
K.SURESH REDDY,J
11-03-2022
.
TSNR
