CourtKutchehry.com
Supreme CourtDivision Bench(1998) 02 SC CK 0058

Sankara Nagamalleswara and Another vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Supreme Court Of India · Decided on 26 February 1998 · Citation: (1998) 2 ACR 987 : AIR 1998 SC 2270 : (1998) AIRSCW 1491 : (1998) 1 ALD(Cri) 525 : (1999) 2 CALLT 91 : (1998) CriLJ 2270 : (1999) 2 JT 222 : (1999) 1 OLR 656 : (1998) 2 SCALE 111 : (1998) 8 SCC 407 : (1998) 2 Supreme 312

HON’BLE JUDGES
V.N. Khare, J · G. T. Nanavati, J
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No. 691 of 1990 with Criminal A. No. 8/91

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 445 words

Judgment pronounced by Nanavati, J.—Both these appeals arise out of the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 1031/87. Criminal Appeal No. 691/90 is filed by S. Nagamalleswara (A-3) and S. Babu Rao (A-4). Criminal Appeal No. 8/91 is filed by V. Mankyala Rao (A-2).

2.

The appellants have been convicted u/s 302 IPC for causing death of K. Sivaramakrishnaiah. Their conviction is based upon the evidence of PWs. 1, 2 and 3 and the two dying declarations - Ex.P.15 and Ex.P.13. The High Court confirmed their conviction mainly relying upon the two dying declarations. It held that though Pws. 1,2 and 3 are partisan witnesses their evidence could be utilised for the purpose of corroboration.

3.

Learned counsel for the appellants was not able to point out how Pws.2 and 3 who were not related to the deceased could be regarded as partisan witnesses. As their services were hired for the day for cultivating his land they were with the deceased while he was returning from his field and when the incident took place. Nothing was brought on record to show that they had any enmity with the deceased. The trial court had rightly placed reliance upon their evidence. As stated earlier, the High Court has also relied upon their evidence though for the purpose of corroboration. The dying declaration Ex.P. 15 was recorded by the Investigating Officer at about 7.15 p.m. and Ex.P. 13 was recorded by the Judicial Magistrate at about 9.30 p.m. Both the dying declarations have been found as genuine and true and nothing could be urged by the learned counsel for taking a contrary view. The evidence of PWs.2 and 3 and the two dying declarations Ex.P. 15 and Ex.P.13 clearly establish that the appellants were responsible for causing the death of K. Sivaramakrishnaiah.

4.

It was contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that as no injuries were caused on the vital parts of the deceased, they should not have convicted u/s 302 IPC. This contention cannot be accepted because the medical evidence clearly shows that the deceased had died due to the injuries caused to him and the injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. Though not on the vital parts, the injuries caused were serious. Therefore, the appellants have been rightly convicted u/s 302 read with 34 IPC.

5.

As we find that they have been rightly convicted these appeals are dismissed.

6.

The appellants were released on bail during the pendency of these appeals. Their bail is cancelled and they are ordered to surrender to custody to serve out the remaining part of their sentence.