NALLABOTHU RAMULU @ SEETHARAMAIAH Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
LAWS(SC)-2014-4-54
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: ANDHRA PRADESH)
Decided on
April 22,2014
Nallabothu Ramulu @ Seetharamaiah
Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
DWARKA DASS VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]BIHARI NATH GOSWAMI VS. SHIV KUMAR SINGH [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRAPPA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
Cited Judgements :-
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. PRABHU SINGH RAWAT [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-2-243] [REFERRED TO]NAWAL SINGH VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2021-12-17] [REFERRED TO]
BINAY KUMAR @ BINAY MOHAN LAL VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2016-7-1] [REFERRED TO]
BHARATH ROY VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2023-2-38] [REFERRED TO]
THE STATE OF A.P. VS. ADDASARI TRINADHA AND ORS. [LAWS(APH)-2020-5-65] [REFERRED TO]
SATTI ARUNASRI PW 2 VS. SATHI TATA REDDY TATANNA A1 5 OTHERS [LAWS(APH)-2020-5-59] [REFERRED TO]
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. MOHSIN AND ORS. [LAWS(BOM)-2015-2-250] [REFERRED TO]
LOT PRASAD VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2017-8-412] [REFERRED TO]
AMALLAPPA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2019-8-197] [REFERRED TO]
SURAJPAL VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2024-2-73] [REFERRED TO]
SHAMBHU CHOUDHARY VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2022-12-47] [REFERRED TO]
AMIR SINGH AND ORS. VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2020-5-22] [REFERRED TO]
RANVIR SINGH VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(SC)-2023-1-84] [REFERRED TO]
TILOK RAM VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2022-4-261] [REFERRED TO]
SASTHI CHAKRABORTY VS. STATE OF TRIPURA [LAWS(TRIP)-2019-11-3] [REFERRED TO]
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. MADHAV AND ORS. [LAWS(BOM)-2015-2-364] [REFERRED TO]
SHYAM SUNDER RAUT VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2023-5-57] [REFERRED TO]
YOGESH S/O LATE RANGAPPA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY YESHWANTHPURA POLICE YESHWANTHPURA BANGALORE [LAWS(KAR)-2018-6-486] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. HARSHOORBHAI K DHADHAL & 1 ORS [LAWS(GJH)-2015-10-298] [REFERRED]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. MAHENDRAKUMAR @ MENDO KRUSHNAPRASAD DAVE [LAWS(GJH)-2022-4-58] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH KANNAD POLICE STATION, KANNAD, DIST A BAD VS. ILLIYAS S/O SK CHAND [LAWS(BOM)-2017-10-116] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. RAJESHBHAI LAXMAN MAKWANA [LAWS(GJH)-2016-7-372] [REFERRED TO]
DODHI SINGH MUNDA VS. LAKHAN SINGH MUNDA [LAWS(JHAR)-2019-1-47] [REFERRED TO]
DEENA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2017-12-185] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. PRADEEP AMARSINH @ AMUBHAI PARMAR [LAWS(GJH)-2017-1-107] [REFERRED TO]
SHIV BAHADUR RAM VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2019-7-51] [REFERRED TO]
BOCHU SRINIVASULU MUNTHOUDU VS. STATE OF A.P. [LAWS(APH)-2020-5-20] [REFERRED TO]
PATAN ROWF KHAN VS. STATE OF A. P. [LAWS(APH)-2020-5-68] [REFERRED TO]
ARUN & ANOTHER VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2017-7-236] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH VS. KAMLESH ALIAS KAKA [LAWS(HPH)-2016-12-79] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)Both these appeals are directed against judgment and order dated 24/07/2003 passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No.921 of 2000 and, hence, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.)The appellants were charged and tried by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur in Sessions Case No.967 of 1994 inter alia for offences under Sections 147, 148, 324, 307, 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC. Learned Sessions Judge by judgment dated 11/2/2000 acquitted all the accused. The State of Andhra Pradesh carried an appeal from the said order to the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. By the impugned judgment and order dated 24/07/2003, the High Court set aside the order of acquittal and convicted the appellants in Criminal Appeal No.1424 of 2003 viz. A1-Nallabothu, A3- Rayidi Brahmaiah, A4-Rayidi Purnaiah, A11-Nallabothu Sreenivasa Rao, A14- Rayidi Kotiah, A15-Rayidi Veera Mallaiah, A16-Mupalla Ramaiah, A21-Rayidi Lingiah, A23-Rayidi Sreenivasarao, A24-Duggineni Peraiah, A25-Mannem Hanumantha Rao, A27-Rayidi Ramarao and A29-Rayidi Venkateswarlu, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code ("the IPC") and sentenced each one of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. In addition, Accused No.3 and Accused No.4 were convicted under Section 324 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years each. Accused No.25 was convicted under Section 324 of the IPC and also under Section 324 read with Section 149 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year on each count. The appellants in Criminal Appeal No.15 of 2004 viz. A38-Chalamala Veeraiah and A39-Chalamala Subbarao were, however, convicted under Section 324 read with Section 149 of the IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year each. The appellants in both the appeals were also convicted under Section 148 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each. The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Being aggrieved by their conviction and sentence, the appellants have approached this Court. For the sake of convenience, we shall refer to the accused and the prosecution witnesses as per the numbers assigned to them by the trial court.
(3.)Tondepi village is a faction-ridden village within the limits of Muppala Police Station. There were two groups in the village, against whom, cases and counter-cases were pending. There were land disputes between A28-Rayidi Anjaiah and his father Rayidi Venkatappaiah. One group was supporting A28-Rayidi Anjaiah and the other group was supporting his father.
(2.)The appellants were charged and tried by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur in Sessions Case No.967 of 1994 inter alia for offences under Sections 147, 148, 324, 307, 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC. Learned Sessions Judge by judgment dated 11/2/2000 acquitted all the accused. The State of Andhra Pradesh carried an appeal from the said order to the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. By the impugned judgment and order dated 24/07/2003, the High Court set aside the order of acquittal and convicted the appellants in Criminal Appeal No.1424 of 2003 viz. A1-Nallabothu, A3- Rayidi Brahmaiah, A4-Rayidi Purnaiah, A11-Nallabothu Sreenivasa Rao, A14- Rayidi Kotiah, A15-Rayidi Veera Mallaiah, A16-Mupalla Ramaiah, A21-Rayidi Lingiah, A23-Rayidi Sreenivasarao, A24-Duggineni Peraiah, A25-Mannem Hanumantha Rao, A27-Rayidi Ramarao and A29-Rayidi Venkateswarlu, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code ("the IPC") and sentenced each one of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. In addition, Accused No.3 and Accused No.4 were convicted under Section 324 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years each. Accused No.25 was convicted under Section 324 of the IPC and also under Section 324 read with Section 149 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year on each count. The appellants in Criminal Appeal No.15 of 2004 viz. A38-Chalamala Veeraiah and A39-Chalamala Subbarao were, however, convicted under Section 324 read with Section 149 of the IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year each. The appellants in both the appeals were also convicted under Section 148 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each. The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Being aggrieved by their conviction and sentence, the appellants have approached this Court. For the sake of convenience, we shall refer to the accused and the prosecution witnesses as per the numbers assigned to them by the trial court.
(3.)Tondepi village is a faction-ridden village within the limits of Muppala Police Station. There were two groups in the village, against whom, cases and counter-cases were pending. There were land disputes between A28-Rayidi Anjaiah and his father Rayidi Venkatappaiah. One group was supporting A28-Rayidi Anjaiah and the other group was supporting his father.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.