PUBLIC PROSECUTOR A P Vs. NALAM SURYANARAYANA MURTY
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR A.P.
NALAM SURYANARAYANA MURTY
Click here to view full judgement.
Kondaiah, J. -
(1.) (Judgment of the Bench delivered by Kondaiah, J) This appeal by the State is directed against the Judgment of the Sessions Court, East Godavari acquitting the respondent of the charge of murder of his wife and releasing him under Section 4 (J) of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (hereinafter called the Act) instead of sentencing him to any imprisonment for the offence under section 323 I.P.C.
(2.) The case for the prosecution as revealed from the evidence of the witnesses examined by it is as follows. The respondent and his wife, the deceased Sesharatnam were together running a sundry shop in the front portion of th;ir house in Komaragiripatnana, Amalapuram Taluk in the District of East Godavari. At about 3-00 PM on March 26 1970 the accused found fault with the deceased for having paid some excess change to one of their customers while managing the shop and abused her. The deceased denying the payment of any excess change to any customer, retorted, as a result of which there was a sudden quarrel. The accused, in a fit of anger, picked up the iron weight of 200 grams (M.O.1) and hit with it on the head of the deceased only once, as a result of which she fell down with a bleeding injury crying aloud. The accused ran away from his shop. On hearing the cries of the deceased, D. Satyavathi and E. Bhagyamma, the neighbours came to the scene and rendered first aid to the deceased who died at about 6-50 p. m. P. Ws. 1 and 2, who had witnessed the occurrence, traced the accused at about 7-00 P. M. near the house of Metla Narasimha Murthi and produced him before P. W. 3, an elder of the village. P. W. 1 gave a complaint Ex. P-1 to the Village Munsif (P. W. 4) on the next day morning. After preparing the printed reports Exs. P-2 & P-3, P-W. 4 sent Exs. P-l and P-2 to the police at Amalapuram and Ex. P-3 to the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Amalapuram. P. W 9, the Sub Inspector of Police, on receipt of Exs. P-1 and P-2 at about 12-30 P, M on March 27, 1970, registered the case unler section 302 I. P. C . and sent Ex. P-19, the First Information Report to the concerned authorities. P. W. 10 the Circle Inspector of Police, on receipt of the First Information Report at about 1-15 P. M. reached the scene of offence by 2-30 P. M. He held inquest over the dead body of the deceased between 3 and 5 P. M. and prepared Ex. P. 4 the inquest Report in the presence of p. W. 7 and others. During the inquest, he examined P. W.s 1 to 3 and others. P. W. 3 in whose custody the accused was kept, had produced him before P. W. 10 who arreste 1 him P. W. 10 seized M. O. 1 the iron weight of 200 grams from the shop of the accused under Ex. P-18 The dead body was sent through the corpse constable (P. W. 8) to P. W. 5. the Woman Assistant Surgeon, Government Hospital, Amalapuram for conducting autopsy. She conducted post-mortem examination from 10 A. M. on March 28, 1970 and found a lacerated injury 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 '' on the left side of scalp placed vertically 2" above the hair margin and issued Ex- P-1, the post-mortem certificate. No injary to the skull bone nor a fracture of the underlying skull bons was noticed by the dostor She opined that the death of the deceased might have been due to shock on account of the injury. After completing the investigation, the charge sheet was filed by P. W. H on August 3, 1970. The prosecution examined as many as 20 witnesses out of whom P. Ws. 1 and 2 are direct witnesses to the occurance. P W. 3 is the village elder in whose custody the accused was kept and who produced the accused before P. W. 10 when he came to the village, P. W. 4 is the village Munsif who recorded Ex P-1, the First information Report from P.W. 1. P. W. 5 is the Medical Officer who conducted the autopsy over the dead body, P. W. 6 is the Head Clerk of the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, who speaks to the receipt of the material objects. P. W. 7 is a Panchayatdar for the seizure of M. O- 1 ,and other material objects. P. W. 8 is the Corpse constable. P. W- 9. the Sub Inspector of Police and P. W, 10 the Circle Inspector of police are the investigation officers. P. W. 11 filed the charge sheet. The plea of the accused is one of denial. According to his statement under section 342 Cr P. C., he had gone out for collecting the outstandings and by the time he returned, Satyavathi and Bhagyama were attending on his wife who was injured, He did not see the injury but went out to fetch a doctor and by the time he returned she was dead.
(3.) The trial court believed the evidence of the direct witnesses, P. Ws. 1 and 2 and held that it was the respondent who inflicted the injury on the deceased, but found him guilty under Section 323 I .P.C. as the injury was simple in nature, acquiting him of the charge of murder. Applying the provisions of section 4 (1) of the Act, the accused was released on his entering into a bond for Rs. 500/- with two sureies each for a like sum to appear and receive the sentence when called upon during the period of one year from the date of the Judgment. Hence this appeal by the State.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.