PUTTA VENKATRAYUDU Vs. STATE
LAWS(APH)-1955-3-25
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on March 14,1955

PUTTA VENKATRAYUDU Appellant
VERSUS
STATE Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

QUEEN EMPRESS V.C.P.FOX. [REFERRED TO]
SANKARALINGA MUDALIAR V. NARAYANA MUDALIAR [REFERRED TO]
VEERAPPA NAIDU V. AVUDAYAMMAL [REFERRED TO]
THEVAR V. SHANMUGHASUNDARA THEVAR [REFERRED TO]
MOHAN SINGH V. EMPEROR [REFERRED TO]
BASHIMDDIN AHMED V. EMPEROR [REFERRED TO]
MONDIAL CHUNILAL V. EMPEROR [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRIKA VS. REX [REFERRED TO]
BANWARI LAL VS. EMPEROR [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

SADHU SINGH VS. STATE [LAWS(ALL)-1961-4-8] [REFERRED TO]
RAJ NARAIN VS. STATE [LAWS(ALL)-1958-10-12] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Bhimasankaram, J. - (1.)By a judgment dated 10th January, 1955, we disposed of Criminal Appeal No. 454 of 1954. The appellant therein was the first accused in Sessions Case No. 50 of 1954 in the Court of Session, Visakhapatnam Division. He was convicted by the learned Sessions Judge under section 114 read with section 302, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to transportation for life. The conviction and sentence were confirmed by our judgment in the appeal. It may be no ted that he was tried along with two other accused in the Sessions Court and there were two different charges framed, one against him and the other two accused (first charge) and another against him and the third accused (second charge). The charges are as follows : (1) That you three on or about 28th day of March, 1954, before 11 P.M. at Koruprolu, agreed to cause to be done an illegal act to wit murdering Putta Appalaraju and that the same act to wit murder of Putta Appalaraj was done in pursuance of the agreement and you three thereby committed an offence punishable under section I2O-B read with section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and within my cognizance. (2) That you (1) Putta Venkatrayudu (A-1) and (2), Putta Chinnayya (A-3) on the night of 28th day of March, 1954, at about 11 P.M. at Koruprolu in "furtherance of the said conspiracy and in furtherance of common intention of you both, did jointly commit murder by intentionally causing the death of Putta Appalaraju of Koruprolu, by inflicting injuries on his head and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 302 lead with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and within my cognizance."
(2.)The learned Sessions Judge found that there was not sufficient evidence to hold A-2 and A-3 guilty under the first charge. He also gave the benefit of doubt to A-3 under the second charge. The learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 454 of 1954 under section 114 read with section 302, Indian Penal Code, as already stated above.
(3.)Mr. G.K.V. Devar, the learned counsel for the appellant, now seeks through this unnumbered petition a rehearing of the appeal mainly on two points. His first contention is that there is an acquittal of the appellant under section 302 read with section 34, Indian Penal Code and that the acquittal bars the Court from convicting him upon the same facts under a different section, so long as the acquittal is in force, by virtue of section 403 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Secondly, he states that the learned Sessions Judge was under a misapprehension that the first accused was actually charged under section 114 read with section 302, Indian Penal Code. He admits that these points were not raised at the time of the hearing of the appeal, but he urges that it is necessary in the interests of Justice that the appeal should be reheard on the ground that an act of Court should not prejudice any party and that, if there is a clear error of law resulting in miscarriage of justice this Court is not without power to rectify it.
;


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