NAMALA SUBBA RAO Vs. STATE OF A P
LAWS(SC)-2006-10-30
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: ANDHRA PRADESH)
Decided on October 17,2006

NAMALA SUBBA RAO Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

KOLMET BUILDERS VS. BSES RAJDHANI POWER LTD [LAWS(DLH)-2007-10-28] [REFERRED TO]
ALOKE NATH DUTTA VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(SC)-2006-12-81] [REFERRED TO]
NUR ISLAM VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2018-11-163] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

A. K. Mathur, J. - (1.)The present appeal is directed against an order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Andhra Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No. 77 of 2002 whereby the Division Bench has affirmed the conviction of the accused-appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter to be referred to as "I.P.C.") and sentence of imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 1000/-.
(2.)Aggrieved against this order, the accused-appellant has preferred the present appeal.
(3.)Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that the accused is the husband of Namala Kannamma (for short deceased). The accused had a daughter by name Namala Venkata Laxmi. He along with his deceased wife and daughter was residing in the house situated at 18th Ward, Old Town, Tanuku. He suspected his wifes fidelity because of the illicit intimacy with PW-2 Kokkirigadda Someswara Rao. He asked his daughter PW-6 to keep a watch on the deceased wife. He also communicated to the deceased wife to snap her relationship with PW-2. But his wife did not listen to him. Four or five days prior to the incident i.e. on 12th November, 1996, deceased had left the house of the accused and started residing with PW-2. On 12th November, 1996, the accused sent a word to his deceased wife through PW-3 Velagada Suramma to return home. PW-3 communicated the message to the deceased that her presence was required at her house by her husband. The deceased told PW-3 to inform her husband that she would come sometime later. The reply of the deceased got the accused enraged. He went to the house of PW-2 and on his way he picked MO.2 Baditha from PW-4 Sambhana Satyanarayana, a carpenter. After reaching at the house of the PW-2, the accused dealt blows to the deceased with MO.2 Baditha and killed her. Later on the accused went to PW-1, Atchuyutharama, Rao, an Administrative Officer of that village at 1.45 P.M. and informed him the circumstances under which he has killed his wife. The accuseds clothes were stained with blood and he was armed with MO.2 Baditha in his hand. PW-1, an Administrative Officer wrote out a report and obtained the signature as well as the thumb impression of the accused thereon and produced the same as Ex.P-1 before PW-11, A.V.R.P.V. Prasad, Incharge, Police Station, Tanuku. The Sub-Inspector of Police, PW-11 received the statement of the accused along with the endorsement of PW-1 thereon and registered a case under Section 302, I.P.C. He seized the blood-stained shirt and blood-stained Baditha from the accused and the same was kept under the cover of Ex. P-19 in the presence of P.W.9, Bhogaraju Subba Rao, P.W.1- Administrative Officer and other Panch witnesses of the village. Thereafter, PW-12 B.V. Chandra Rao, Inspector of Police, Tadepalligudem Circle, inspected the scene of occurrence and seized two pairs of hawai chappals, broken bangles and found the blood-stained earth. Necessary panchanama of the deceased body was also prepared in presence of the witnesses. After completion of investigation a charge-sheet was filed against the accused under the aforesaid section. The prosecution in support of its case examined 14 witnesses and got the documents marked Ex. P-1 to P-24 and material objects 1 to 11.


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