RAVULA ANANTAIAH Vs. NIMMAGADDA KISTAIAH
LAWS(APH)-1971-6-8
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on June 22,1971

RAVULA ANANTAIAH Appellant
VERSUS
NIMMAGADDA KISTAIAH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This petition is by the complainant examined as P.W. 1 in S.C. No. 15 of 1970 on the file of the Asst. Sessions Judge, Nizamabad, to revise the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Nizamabad, setting aside the conviction of the 16 accused under sections 148 and 307, Indian Penal Code and under section 324, Indian Penal Code, against A-2, A 4 to A-11, A-14, to A-16 and convicting instead only A-1, A-3, A-12 and A-13 under section 323, Indian Penal Code.
(2.) The case of the prosecution was that there was a dispute on account of a Father in the Roman Catholic Church constructing a house in the site belonging to Brahmangari Mattam in the village of Dharmaram and in that connection there was a faction led by P. W. 1 on one side and A-1 on the other and in October, 1968 P. W. 1 was beaten on the pretext that he trespassed into the house of one Satyanarayana and molested his wife and as there was an apprehension of the breach of peace, the police took action under section 107, Criminal Procedure Code, that on 15th February, 1969, K. Satyanarayana was beaten by Viswanatham and others and he was admitted in the Headquarters Hospital at Nizamabad, that the next day there was a false rumour in the village that Satyanarayana succumbed to the injuries in the hospital and thereupon all the accused met in the house of A-14 and conspired to put an end to P. W. 1 and his party members, that at about 6-30 A.M. that day, all the accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly armed with lathes with the common object of beating P.W. 1 and his party men, left the house dividing themselves into three batches and while A-14 and his son A-4 and two others stood in the lane leading to Ananthaiah's house, the remaining two batches went towards the hotel situated in the main road and there beat P. W. 7 and 8 that from there they went to the house of P. W. 1 and surrounded it, started abusing P. W. 1 in filthy language and threatened to set fire to the house as the inmates of the house bolted the house from inside that thereupon P. Ws. 1 and 4 who were inside the house were trying to escape through rear door and at the same time when four constables arrived through the main gate, the accused ran behind the house and there seeing P.W. 1 beat him with sticks on his legs and other parts of the body and then ran away, that on a report given by P.W. 6, a case was registered and P. W. 1 was sent to the hospital P. W. 11 examined P. W. 1 and also P. Ws. 7 and 8 and issued the wound certificates and after investigation the charge-sheet was filed. The prosecution examined 17 witnesses in support of their case. The accused denied their having committed t he offence intheir statements and further contended that the case has been foisted on them by the members of the other party. No witness was examined in their defence.
(3.) The Assistant Sessions Judge convicted all the accused under sections 148 and 307, Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and 3 1/2 years respectively and A-5 to A-12 under section 324, Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to rigorous imprisonment for 2 years directing the sentences to run concurrently. On appeal the learned Sessions Judge found that the prosecution had established satisfactorily the case against A-1, A-3, A-12 and A-13 for beating P. W. 1 and not against the rest of the accused and even with regard to the offence committed by A-1, A-12and A-13 he found that on the evidence on record the accused could not have intended to cause the death of P. W. 1 and the fractures sustained by P. W. 1 have not been established by examining the Radiologist and the production of X-ray photographs and that the offence committed would only fall under section 323, Indian Penal Code, in that view he set aside the convictions against all the accused and convicted A-1, A-3, A-12 and A-13 only under section 323, Indian Penal Code. The State has not chosen to prefer any appeal. This petition has been filed only by the complainant P. W. 1.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.