- (1.) There were two groups in the village of Venkatayapalem in Khammam district. One group was led by Kutumbaka Bitsava Narayana (A-4) supported by Congress Party and the other group by deceased No. 1 supported by C.P.l. Number of incidents took place and a bitter enmity existed between the two factions which also led to filing of criminal cases.
(2.) On 4-11-1975 a large scale rioting took place in the village in the course of which two persons died and several witnesses particularly P.Ws. 1 to 5 belonged to the deceased party, received injuries. In respect of the said occurrence, the police charge-sheeted as many as 43 accused. The learned Sessions Judge, Khammam tried all the 43 accused for offences punishable u/ ss. 147, 148, 30@ read with Ss. 149,'324, 325, 326, I.P.C. On behalf of the prosecution as many as 23 witnesses were examined. Out of them P.Ws. 1 to 8, 9, 125 13 figured as the eye-witnesses. P. WS. 10 and 1 1 are the doctors and others are the official witnesses. The accused pleaded not guilty. However, three of them pleaded alibi including A-16, D.Ws. 1 to 4 were examined. The trial Court having examined the evidence found it difficult to accept the prosecution case and acquitted.all the accused. The State being aggrieved by the judgment, filed an appeal against acquittal against all the acquitted accused. A Division Bench of the High Court to a large extent, agreed with the findings of the trial Court. It also held that common object of the lawful assembly was only to cause grievous hurt and that the fatal blow cannot be attributed to any particular accused. So far as the attack on deceased No. 2 is concerned, the High Court found that the prosecution has not established the guilt of any of the assailants. It, however, convicted AI to 3, 5, 11, 16, 19, 23, 30. Out of them Aag, 23 and 30 were convicted u/S. 147, I.P.C. and, sentenced to one year RI. The others were convicted u /S. 148 and sentenced to two years and u/ S. 326 read with S. 149, I.P.C. sentenced to 7 years. These 9 convicted accused are the appellants before us in the appeal pursuant to the granting of special leave.
(3.) Mr. K ' Madhava Reddy and Mr. U. R. Lalit learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that the High Court 'having agreed with the reasoning of the Sessions Court on. all material aspects and having rejected the substratum of the prosecution case, gross erred in convicting the appellants. It is also their submission that the reasons given for rejecting the evidence Of D.Ws. 1 to 4 regarding the alibi of AI and 16 are also unsound.;