Non-Reportable  

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Criminal Appeal Nos. 2089-2090 of 2009

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH ……… APPELLANT

VERSUS

PULLAGUMMI KASI REDDY KRISHNA REDDY  @ RAMA KRISHNA REDDY  & ORS.    …….. RESPONDENTS

J U D G M E N T  

 L.  NAGESWARA  RAO, J

1.  There  were  two  factions  in  Chindukur  village,

Gadivemula  Police  Station,  Kurnool  District,  Andhra

Pradesh.  One faction was led by V. Venkateswara Reddy

and  the  other  by  Sivarami  Reddy  (Deceased  No.1).   V.

Venkateswara  Reddy  was  murdered  in  July,  1992.  In

retaliation, persons belonging to   V. Venkateswara Reddy’s

group murdered four  supporters  of  Sivarami Reddy.   On

11th October,  1994,  Crime Nos.  92 and 93 of  1994 was

registered in Gadivemula Police Station under Section 5 of

the  Explosive  Substances  Act,  1908  against  persons  of

1

both  groups.   Sivarami  Reddy  (Deceased  No.1)  was

released on conditional bail.  One of the conditions for bail

was that he had to attend Gadivemula Police Station every

Sunday between 6.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m.  

2. On 30th October, 1994, Sivarami Reddy along with his

supporters  and  two  escort  police  constables  left  his

residence at 9.00 a.m. in a jeep to mark his attendance at

Gadivemula Police Station. When the jeep was passing by

the house of A-1 (wife of V. Venkateswara Reddy) a bullock

cart was pushed across the road by A-2, A-3 and A-4 to

stop the jeep.  A-1 who was standing on the compound

wall exhorted the other accused to hurl bombs and kill the

deceased.  A-5 to A-15 came out of the house of A-1 and

rushed  towards  the  jeep  in  which  Sivarami  Reddy  and

others were travelling.  According to the prosecution, A-5

to A-7, A-9, A-11 to A-14 hurled country made bombs on

the jeep.  One bomb exploded on the face of Y.  Ayyapu

Reddy (Deceased No.2) who was driving the jeep.  In an

attempt  to  escape,  Sivarami  Reddy  (Deceased  No.1)

started running while looking back and a bomb thrown by

A-7 exploded on the head of Sivarami Reddy due to which

2

he died on the spot.  A-8, A-10, A-15 to A-37, A-42 to A-47

who  were  armed  with  hunting  sickles  and  iron  pipes

attacked Rami Reddy (Deceased No.3) and hacked him to

death.   A-13,  A-38  to  A-41  chased  Kambagiri  Ramudu

(Deceased No.4) armed with country made bombs.   The

bomb thrown by A-13 hit Kambagiri Ramudu on his back

and  the  explosion  caused  his  death  on  the  spot.   A.

Ayyalanna (PW-1), N. Subrahmanyam, Y. Mudduleti Reddy,

Sunka Raju, Balaraju (PW-6) and Janardhan Reddy (PW-7)

and  the  escort  police  constable  Gopal  Rao  received

splinter  injuries  in  the  bomb  blast.   The  prosecution

version is that the escort constable Gopal Rao opened fire

in  the  air  due  to  which  the  accused  fled.   The  Sub

Inspector  of  Police,  Gadivemula Police Station rushed to

the  spot  on  receiving  information  and  recorded  the

statement  of  A.  Ayyalanna(PW1)  at  9:45  a.m.  FIR  No.

99/1994  was  registered  at  11.00  a.m.   The  police

conducted the inquest between 12.30 p.m. and 3.30 p.m.

and  the  FIR  was  sent  to  the  Magistrate  at  5:00  p.m.

Thereafter, the bodies of all the four deceased were sent

for Post Mortem on the same day.   The explosives expert

3

opined  that  the  bombs  used  by  the  accused  could

endanger  human life  on  explosion.  A  charge  sheet  was

filed against the accused under Sections 147, 148,  302,

307, 324, 332 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal

Code, 1860 (for short ‘the IPC’) and Sections 3 and 4 of the

Explosive Substances Act, 1908.  47 persons were shown

as  accused  in  the  charge  sheet.   By  mistake

Vaddegittannagari Kothuru Subbarayudu was shown as A-

36 and A-42 due to which A-42 was deleted from the list of

the  accused.  Vallapureddy  Anasuyamma(A-1),  Boya

Shakunala  Ramadu(A-2),  Pashula  Bheemanna(A-3),  Boya

Ayula  Pullaiah(A-4)  Bathula  Satyanarayana  Reddy(A-5),

Bathula Aki Reddy(A-8), Murasinin Hanumantha Reddy(A-

24), Vadde Sambasivudu (A-43),  Bathula Gopal Reddy(A-

44),  Golla  Peda  Saibaba(A-45),  Valapureddy  Pratap

Singh(A-46)  and  Kasideddi  Krishna  Reddy  (A-47) were

acquitted by the trial Court.  Seema Govinda Reddy(A-6),

Mulinti  Telugu Sreemulu(A-7),  Sura Sreedhar  Reddy(A-9),

Vadde  Gunja  Venkatasubbadu(A-10)  Kasireddy  Bhupal

Reddy(A-11),   Kasireddy  Vasantha  Kumar  Reddy(A-12),

Pullagummi  Kasireddy  Krishna  Reddy(A-13),  Bathula

4

Pranamananda Reddy(A-14), Vadde Pallapu Jambula(A-15),

Kondapuram  Narayana  Reddy(A-16),  Bathula  Sankar

Reddy (A-17),  Vade Malesh(A-18),  Yedula  Rami  Reddy(A-

19),  Perugu  Pedda  Venkateswarlu(A-20),  Mulla  Sha

Hussaini(A-21),  Mulla  Moula  Peera(A-22),  Mulla  Hassan

Peera  (A-23),  Murasani  Sudersana  Reddy(A-25),  Vade

Hanumanna(A-26),  Vadde  Sindesudu(A-27),  Vadde

Venkatesu(A-28),  Vadde  Gittannagari  Chinna

Subbarayudu(A-29),  Vadde  Rameshudu(A-30),  Murasani

Venkatswara  Reddy(A-31),  Golla  Chinna  Saibaba(A-32),

Seema  Chenchi  Reddy(A-33),  Telugu  Sankaraiah(A-34),

Vadde  Gittannagari  Kotturu  Chinna  Sabbadu(A-35),

Vaddegittannagari  Kothuru  Subbarayudu  (A-36),  Bathula

Venkateswara  Reddy(A-37),  Vadde  Koppugadu  @

Sreeramulu(A-38),  Sura Papi  Reddy (A-39),  Vadde Pedda

Venkateswarlu  (A-40),  Kasireddy  Venkateswar  Reddy  (A-

41) were convicted by the trial Court under Section 302

read  with  Section  149  of  the  IPC  and  sentenced  to  life

imprisonment.  A-6, A-7, A-9, A-11 to A14 and A-38 to A-41

were also convicted under Section 3 and 5 of the Explosive

5

Substances Act.  The acquittal of A-1 to A-5, A-8, A-24 and

A-43 to A-47 was not challenged by the State.   

3. The accused who were convicted for various offences

by the trial Court filed appeals before the High Court of

Andhra Pradesh.  The High Court allowed the appeals and

acquitted  all  the  accused.   Aggrieved,  the  State  has

preferred the above appeal.   4. The  trial  Court  held  that  A-1  was  entitled  to  the

benefit of doubt.   The evidence relating to A-1 climbing

over a 10 feet high wall and instigating the other accused

to hurl bombs was found to be artificial by the trial Court.

The alibi pleaded by her that she was not in the village on

the  date  of  incident  as  she  was  in  Peddapadu  village

visiting her  ailing sister’s  husband was accepted by the

trial Court. A-2 to A-4 were also given the benefit of doubt

and  acquitted  by  the  trial  Court  as  no  overt  acts  were

attributed to them except placing a double bullock cart on

the road.  The finding recorded by the trial Court is to the

effect  that  the  sketches  prepared  by  the  investigating

officer marked as Exhibit 20 and 25 clearly showed that

there was no hinderance for the jeep to pass through the

road in spite of the bullock cart being placed on the road.

6

Similarly,  A-5  was  also  acquitted  as  the  trial  Court

accepted the evidence of DW-1 and held that he was not

present  in  the village at  the time of  commission of  the

offence  on  30th October,  1994.   A-8  volunteered  to  be

examined  as  DW-3.  He  was  a  practicing  advocate  at

Kurnool. His version was that he was coming to the village

from  Kurnool  and  mid-way  he  was  informed  about  the

incident.  On receipt of the said information, according to

A-8,  he returned to  Kurnool.   After  examining the other

evidence on record, the trial Court acquitted A-8 by giving

him the benefit of doubt.  A-24 who was the paid Secretary

in  a  Cooperative  Society  pleaded  that  he  was  at

Karimaddela  village  on  30th October  1994.  He  went  to

collect  the  debts  due  to  the  cooperative  society.   No

specific overt acts had been attributed to him.  The trial

Court accepted the submission on behalf of A-24 regarding

the propensity of the prosecution witnesses to implicate all

persons belonging to  the opposite  group.   A-43 to  A-47

were also acquitted as their names did not find mention in

the FIR and no specific overt act was attributed to them.

While  repelling the submissions of  the defence that  the

7

prosecution  version  bristles  with  contradictions and

improbabilities, the trial Court examined the evidence on

record to convict the other accused.  The evidence of PWs-

1, 6 and 7 who were injured eye-witnesses was relied upon

by the trial Court.  Minor contradictions in their evidence

were ignored.  The testimony of PWs- 2, 3 and 5 who were

chance witnesses was also relied upon by the trial Court.   

5. The appeals filed by the Respondents/Accused were

allowed.  The  High  Court  acquitted  all  the  Accused  by

reversing  the  judgment  of  the  Trial  Court.   The  entire

incident  was  disbelieved  by  the  High  Court  as  the

prosecution version was found to be improbable.  The High

Court found many contradictions and discrepancies in the

evidence of the eye witnesses.  After referring to the law

laid down by this Court on appreciation of evidence, the

High  Court  held  that  the  evidence  of  PWs-1,  6  and  7

cannot  be  relied  upon  as  they  belong  to  the  faction  of

deceased No.1 and were closely related to the deceased.

The High Court further held that the evidence of all  the

eye-witnesses  cannot  be  accepted  as  they  made  an

attempt  to  rope  in  number  of  persons  belong  to  the

8

opposite  faction.   PWs-1,  6  and  7  were  found  to  be

unreliable  witnesses  as  the  allegations  made  by  them

against A-1 to A-5, A-8, A-24 and A-43 to A-47 were found

to be false even by the trial Court.  PWs- 2, 3 and 5 were

dubbed  as  interested  witnesses  by  the  High  Court  and

their presence at the spot was also doubted.  According to

the High Court,  PWs-2, 3 and 5 were planted witnesses.

The High Court further observed that a number of persons

belonging to the faction of the accused were implicated

after  consultations.   As  the  credibility  of  the  above

witnesses  was  doubted  by  the  High  Court,  all  the

Respondents/Accused were acquitted by the High Court.   

6. It  is  necessary  to  mention  that  the

Respondents/Accused (30 in number) presently before us

are, A-6, A-9 to A-19, A-21 to A-23, A-25 to A-31, A-33 to A-

38 and A-40 to A-41.  It is also relevant to note that we are

not concerned with A-1 to A-5 A-8, A-24 and A-43 to A-47

who were acquitted by the trial Court and whose acquittal

has become final.  A-7, A-20, A-32 and A-39 died during

the pendency of this Appeal.  I.A. No. 33287/2018 was filed

before  us  bringing  on  record  that  Murasani  Sudersana

9

Reddy (A-25) was a minor at the time of the incident and

the said fact was not noticed before the Courts below. The

counsel  for  the  Appellant-  State  took  time  to  seek

instructions  and  it  was  submitted  that  the  details

submitted by the Senior Counsel for the Respondents were

correct.  

7. The admitted facts of this case are that Chindukur is

a  faction  ridden  village.  There  were  two  factions,  one

headed by the husband of A-1 and other by deceased No.1

Sivarami Reddy.  The husband of A-1 was murdered in July,

1992.  On the same day, 4 supporters of deceased No.1

were killed.  Apart from others, cases under the Explosive

Substances Act  were registered a few days prior  to  the

date  of  the  incident  against  both  sides.   Apprehending

violence, two policemen were posted in the village.  The

deceased No.1 had to report at Gadivemula Police Station

on every Sunday between 6.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m.  The

deceased No.1 had to necessarily cross the house of A-1

which is situated besides the only road which leads to the

police station.   The incident occurred right  opposite the

house of A-1. Four people died in the incident. The medical

10

evidence on record shows that three of them died due to

explosion of bombs on their bodies.  The fourth (Deceased

No.3) died due to injuries caused by sickles and iron pipes.

It would be relevant to refer to the injuries received by the

four deceased.

Injuries on the dead body of D-1:

1. Head:-  Total  disintegration of  the upper half  of  the head with complete loss of upper skull vault upto upper lips.  Eye balls are absent.  Brain is entirely lost.  Charring of tissues with black discoloration of the remaining face.   

2. Chest: Multiple, about a hundred or more small, about 1/4 cm tattooed abrasions extending over entire right side of chest  and  upper  abdomen  right  side.   Right  upper  arm splinter  abrasions  of  the  entire  right  upper  arm. Lacerations about 1 cm diameter over middle of the right upper arm in front, burn of the entire dorsal and medical aspect of right forearm and yellowish discolouration.  Burn of  the  thump,  index  and  middle  fingers  over  the  dorsal aspect with yellowing.   

3. Laceration  of  left  hand  3  cm x  2  cm x  1  cm over  the dorsum.  Burn of the left forearm dorsal aspect 8 cm x 3 cm.  Abrasions four  in  number small  ½ cm square area front of right thigh with tattooing.  Abrasions of lower left thigh in front four in number small ½ cm square area with tattooing.   Internal examination: Subcutaneous  fat  is  yellow  muscles  are  pale.   Heart: Pericardium empty.  Heart is pale and empty.  Lungs: Both lungs are collapsed, left lung is pale, right lung upper lobe is congested.  About 50 ml of blood in right plural cavity, left plural cavity is empty.  Liver is pale cut Section pale. Spleen is pale.  Both kidneys are pale, No blood is in the abdominal cavity.  Structures are not injured, no fractures of long bones noted.   The  deceased  would  appear  to  have  died  of  multiple injuries mainly the head leading to hemorrhage and shock and  death.   Time  of  death  6  to  8  hours  prior  to  post mortem.”   

11

Injuries on the dead body of D-2:

“External injuries: Head:  1. contusion 3 cm x 2 cm x 1 cm over the left side of

scalp with laceration 1 cm long over the swelling. 2. Laceration of right cheek 2 cm x ½ cm x ½ cm with  

tattooing.  Entire face is charred and disfigured.  3.  Laceration left side of forehead 1 cm circular with   

tattooing 4. Laceration over bridge of the nose 1 cm x ½ cm.   5. Charred burn of entire back of neck.  Chest  and  abdomen:  Anterior(front)  aspect  of  chest  is burnt with blackish discoloration.  Laceration front of chest 5 cm x 4 cm  square  in  the  upper  middle  aspect  with tattooing.  Laceration 2 cm x 1 cm x ½ cm over right infra claviular area. Abrasion with black discoloration 15 cm x 15 cm over the  

right scapular and supra scapular area. Burn with charring of right infrascapular area15 cm x 10 cm  Peripheral limbs: Laceration 1 cm diameter with charring of  margins over right upper arm.  Burn 3 cm circular over back of right   

upper arm.  Laceration 3 cm x 1 cm lower left upper arm.  Laceration 2  cm x 2 cm with irregular margins front of left upper  arm.   Laceration  2  cm  x  ½  cm  with irregular margins with burns marks over lateral aspect of left upper arm.  Laceration  2  cm  x  1  cm  left  upper forearm with  tattooing.   Laceration  1  cm x  1  cm lower forearm left with black staining.  Blackish soot staining of entire front and side of both lower limbs.  Burn with loss of skin of right calf 4 cm x 2  cm.   Burn  of  upper  right thigh in front thigh in front 4 cm x 3 cm.  Burn of left calf lateral aspect 3 cm x 1 cm.  

Internal:  1. Fracture  of  skull  about  7  cm  long  extending  from centre to the left side over parietal bone crack fracture.  

12

2. Contusion of subcutaneous tissues over the fracture site.   

3. Brain contusion of the entire cortex of the brain on both sides over parietal and occipitalareas.   4. Pericardium empty, Heart empty.  5. Right lung congested.  6. About 100 ml of blood in right plural cavity.  7. Stomach about 400 ml of digested for.  8. Liver pale  9. Kidney are pale, and bladder is empty.  

Opinion as to cause of death:  The deceased would appear to have died of Head injury and multiple burns of the body leading to death about 6-8 hours prior to the Post Mortem” Injuries on the dead body of D-4:

“External injuries: 1. A burst out laceration injury on the back of the body of size 17 ½” x 14 ½” horizontal involving entire left side and extending  on  to  the  right  side  upto  7”  away  from right posterior  axillary  line.   Upper  border  extending  to  just above  the  left  supra  scapular  border.   Lower  border extending upto 3” above the waistline.  Left side of injury extending on to the left anterior axillary line.  Skin at the edge  is  torn  into  irregular  flaps  with  yellow  staining  of under  surface  of  skin  flaps  here  and  there.   Left  para vertebral  muscle  missing  in  the  wound  except  3”  size muscle flap at the lower end of the wound.  The upper end of this muscle flap is irregular torn and the muscle surface is charred.  Left half of the vertebral column is seen with ribs  corresponding  to  the  wound  missing.   Right  sided paravertabral  muscle  present  in  its  entire  length  but blackened.   Left  scapula  with  its  lower  2/3rd missing  is exposed  at  the  upper  side  of  the  wound.   Floor  of  the wound is  irregularly  lacerated with  blackened.  Lacerated organs like left lung, heart spleen, stomach, left kidney are lying exposed in the floor of the wound.  Intestinal coils are also seen in the floor of the wound.  Darkened liquid blood is preset in the floor of the wound seven ¾” size nails are found in the floor of the wound.  The shirt corresponding to the wound is torn on the back.   2. Yellow staining and blackened of kin of size 8” x 3” present on the lower end of arm, elbow and upper end of forearm of left side on the exposed black aspect.  In this area hair is lost.  At the periphery of this area is singed.

13

3/4th size nail is found on the lower end of arm piercing the skin.   3. Contusion of size ½” x ¼” are present along the front border of nose.  Blue in colour.   4. Left upper central incisor broken near gingival margin with  blood  staining  of  the  gingival  margin.   The  distal fragment missing.   

Internal examination :     Thorox: Bony cage: All ribs on left side except upper two are missing.  Right side lower 3 ribs are fractured anteriorly 1st away from the sternum.  Posteriorly all right side ribs are intact.  Lower 2/3rd of left scapula missing.   Lungs: Left lung lacerated posteriorly in its entire length.   Heart: Entire posterior wall of the heat lacerated exposing the chambers of the heart.    Abdomen: Stomach: A tear of size 2 ½” x ½” over posterior wall  of  the  stomach,  stomach  empty.  Intestines  lying exposed in the floor of the wound.   Spleen: Lacerated on its entire posterior surface and lying detached in the wound.  Liver: Posterior surface of the left lobe of liver lacerated.  Kidneys:  Left  kidney  lacerated  posteriorly.   Right  kidney normal.  Opinion as to cause of death: The deceased would appear to have died of injuries to vital organs due to bomb blast.”     

Cause of death of D-3:

15 incised injuries including amputation of the right forearm on the lower 3rd with both bones cut and the hand separated. Opinion as to cause of death: “The deceased would appear to have died on multiple injuries and due to fracture of skull and due to shock and hemorrhage 6- 8 hours prior to post mortem.”

14

8. Ms. Prerna Singh, learned counsel for the Appellant-

State  criticized  the  judgment  of  the  High  Court  on  the

following grounds: a. The  incident  happened  in  the  faction  ridden

Chindukur  village,  right  outside  the  house  of

Accused No. 1 who is the wife of a slain leader

of a warring group.  b. There  was  prior  animosity  between  the  two

factions  and  motive  of  the  crime  was  to  do

away  with  Sivarami  Reddy  (Deceased  No.  1)

who was the leader of the opposite faction. c. There was no delay in lodging the FIR. The oral

evidence  of  all  the  prosecution  witnesses  is

consistent  in  material  particulars  except  for

some minor contradictions and inconsistencies.

The High Court erred in highlighting the minor

contradictions  and  ignoring  the  consistent

testimony of the injured eyewitnesses. d. The  occular  evidence  of  the  eye  witnesses  is

corroborated  by  the  medical  and  forensic

evidence on record. e. In  faction  ridden  villages,  even  if  some

independent  or  impartial  witnesses  were

15

present at or near the scene of the incident they

are not likely to volunteer to give evidence and

it is only the relatives who would be willing to

tender evidence.  

f. The  High  Court  was  wrong  in  discarding  the

evidence  of  the  eyewitnesses  on  the  ground

that they were interested and partisan.  

g. Even if  the evidence of the eyewitnesses was

disbelieved  qua  some accused,  it  can  still  be

relied upon to convict the other accused.

h. The  High  Court  ought  not  to  have  interfered

with  the  well-reasoned  judgment  of  the  Trial

Court.  

i. The entire approach of the High Court appears

to be focused on minor contradictions oblivious

to the fact that four people were killed in broad

daylight on 30.10.1994.  

j. The judgment of the High Court is perverse and

deserves to be set aside.  

16

9. Shri  Basant,  learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent-

Accused   submits  that  the  judgment  of  the  High  Court

warrants no interference for the following reasons:

a. Every  accused  is  presumed  to  be  innocent

unless proven guilty. This presumption is further

strengthened by a finding of acquittal arrived by

a Court.  

b. Though the Privy Council in Sheo Swarup v. King

Emperor1 held that there was no real distinction

between appeal against acquittal and an appeal

against a conviction, it was submitted that the

approach  of  this  Court  has  been  qualitatively

different in cases of appeals against acquittal.

c. It is submitted that this Court should be slow in

interfering with the judgment of acquittal of the

High Court,  if  the view of  the High Court  is  a

possible  one.  The judgment  of  the High  Court

ought not be set aside unless it is perverse.   

d. On  merits,  it  was  submitted  that  the  entire

genesis of the case is extremely doubtful. As per

the FIR, A-1 was the mastermind of the attack 1 AIR 1934 PC 227

17

and  on  her  instigation  the  other  accused

attacked  the  deceased.  This  version  was

disbelieved by the Trial Court and A-1’s plea of

alibi was accepted. A-2 to A-5, A-8, A-24, A-43 to

A-47 were also acquitted by the trial Court.  This

finding  has  attained  finality  as  the  Appellant-

State has not chosen to file an appeal against

the acquittal of A-1 and thus the whole incident

as deposed by the eyewitnesses is riddled with

uncertainty  and  is  highly  doubtful.  In  such  a

situation, the benefit of the doubt should accrue

to the accused. It is not safe to convict any of

the Respondents/Accused.

e. All the eyewitness put forth by the prosecution

are  members  of  the  opposite  faction.  The

credibility  of  the  witnesses  is  also  suspect  as

they are accused in several cases filed by the

Respondents. There is a clear motive to falsely

rope in the Respondent/Accused. The evidence

of  partisan  witnesses  merits  acceptance  only

after a careful scrutiny of the same.  

18

f. Finally, it was urged that this Court should take a

compassionate view of the fact that the incident

took  place  a  long  time  ago  and  the

Respondent/Accused have suffered the agony of

trial for almost 25 years.

10. After  hearing  both  the  parties,  we  undertook  the

exercise  of  examining  the  evidence  on  record.   On  a

thorough scrutiny of the evidence of PWs-1 to 7, we are of

the opinion that the High Court has committed an error in

eschewing their testimonies in toto.  The evidence of PWs-

1, 6 and 7 was found to be unreliable and unbelievable by

the High Court on the ground that they implicated several

persons belonging to the opposite faction.  Reliance was

placed by the High Court on the observations of the Trial

Court while acquitting A-1 to A5, A-8, A-24, A-43 to       A-

47. The High Court held that the evidence of eye witnesses

cannot be relied upon for convicting the other accused.   

11. The principle of ‘Falsus in uno falsus in omnibus’ has

not been accepted in our country.2  Even if some accused

are acquitted on the ground that the evidence of a witness

2 See Bhagwan Jagannath Markad v. State of Maharashtra, (2016) 10 SCC  537 ¶19  

19

is unreliable, the other accused can still be convicted by

relying  on  the  evidence  of  the  same  witness.3   Minor

contradictions and omissions in the evidence of a witness

are to be ignored if there is a ring of truth in the testimony

of a witness.4  The High Court was oblivious to this settled

position  of  law.   The  High  Court  highlighted  the  minor

inconsistencies and omissions in the evidence of PWs- 1 to

3  and  PW-5  to  7  to  disbelieve  them.    The High  Court

wrongly  refused  to  believe  the  eye  witnesses  on  the

ground that they attempted to implicate as many persons

as  possible  by  making  omnibus  allegations.   The  High

Court  further  erred  in  holding  that  PW-1,  6  and 7,  who

were  the  eye  witnesses  travelling  in  the  jeep  with  the

deceased, were not speaking the truth as they were close

relatives and supporters of Deceased No. 1.   The rejection

of the evidence of PW-2, 3 and 5 by the High Court on the

ground that they did not attribute specific overt acts to

each accused is also erroneous.   

12. Undoubtedly, a horrendous crime was committed in a

village in which four persons lost their lives.  There is no

3 See Gangadhar Behera v. State of Orissa, (2002) 8 SCC 381, ¶ 15 4 See State of U.P. v. Dan Singh, (1997) 3 SCC 747 ¶32

20

dispute that the deceased and the accused belonged to

opposite factions.  There is also no doubt about the situs of

the crime.   A-1 to A-5, A-8, A-24 and A-43 to A-47 were

acquitted by the Trial Court.  There is no appeal against

their  acquittal.   The  question  that  remains  for  our

consideration  is  whether  there  is  evidence on record  to

convict the other accused.    

13. All  the  eyewitnesses  including  PW-4  who  turned

hostile  have  consistently  spoken  about  the  attack  on

Sivarami  Reddy  (Deceased  No.1)  and  his  supporters  on

30.10.1994.  PW-1, Ayyalanna gave a vivid description of

the incident.  He deposed that A-5 to A-15 came from the

side of the house of A-1 armed with hunting sickles and

bombs.  They surrounded the jeep and hurled bombs on

the  jeep.   One  bomb  hit  the  driver  Ayyappu  Reddy

(Deceased No.2) who fell down and he was dragged to the

back of the jeep by A-10 and A-15.  A-7 hurled a bomb on

Sivarami Reddy when he was running.  The bomb exploded

on the face of Sivarami Reddy who fell down and died on

the spot.   According to him, A-16 to A-37 surrounded Rami

Reddy,  Deceased  No.3  while  he  was  running  away  and

21

hacked him to  death by hunting sickles  and iron pipes.

Kambagiri Ramudu, Deceased No.4 was chased by A-13, A-

20, A-38, A-39 and A-41.  A-13 threw a bomb which hit on

the back of Kambagiri Ramudu and exploded.  He also died

on the spot.   We are not dealing with the version of PW-1

regarding the involvement of A-1 to A-5, A-8, A-24, A-43 to

A-47 as they have been acquitted by the Trial Court which

has become final. PW-2, K.Venkata Reddy corroborated the

evidence  of  PW-1  in  respect  of  the  occurrence.    He

voluntarily  deposed  that  A-18  to  A-20  were  carrying

sickles, A-16, A-21, A-22 and A-26 were carrying iron pipes,

A-24 was carrying a stick and A-17, A-23, A-25, A-27, A-29

to A-37 were armed with bombs.  As per his deposition,

Rami Reddy was attacked by all the above accused i.e. A-

16  to  A-37  and  he  was  hacked  indiscriminately.   He

categorically stated that Rami Reddy was hacked with iron

pipes, hunting sickles and sticks.   He stated that no bomb

was hurled on Rami Reddy.  PW-3, PW-5, PW-6 and PW-7

deposed  on  the  same  lines  as  PW-1  in  respect  of  the

involvement of A-6, A-9 to A-19, A-21 to A-23, A-25 to A-31,

A-33 to A-38 and A-40 to A-41.

22

14. Admittedly, there are two factions in the village and

the deceased belong to rival groups.  There is no dispute

about the history of murder of persons belonging to either

side before the incident on 30.10.1994.  The oral evidence

in cases of faction fights has to be scrutinized carefully in

view of the tendency of implication of innocent persons

belonging to the opposite group.   After the acquittal  of

some  of  the  accused  and  the  death  of  some  accused

during the pendency of case before the Courts, we have

before us A-6, A-9 to A-19, A-21 to A-23, A-25 to A-31, A-33

to A-38 and A-40 to A-41.   We proceed to deal with the

point  regarding  the  involvement  of  the

Accused/Respondents  before  us  to  decide  whether  they

are  guilty  of  the  offence  punishable  under  Section  302

I.P.C.  A-38, A-40 and A-41 were named by PW-6 and no

specific overt act has been attributed to them.   They are

entitled to the benefit of doubt which was given by the

High Court and we uphold the same.   A-6, A-9, A-11, A-12

and A-14 were armed with country made bombs.   There is

nothing further stated by any of the witnesses regarding

their involvement in the offence.  No specific over act has

23

been attributed to them.  We concur with the judgment of

the High Court that they are also entitled for the benefit of

doubt and entitled to be acquitted.  PW-1, PW-3, PW-5 to

PW-7 have in one voice deposed that A-13 hurled bomb on

Kambagiri Ramudu due to which he died on the spot.  The

medical  evidence  is  in  conformity  with  the  occular

testimonies  of  all  the  eyewitnesses.   On  a  detailed

consideration  of  the  evidence  on  record,  we  hold  A-13

guilty of an offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. for

causing the death of Kambagiri Ramudu (Deceased No.4).

A-10 was armed with a sickle and A-15 was armed with a

country-made bomb.   There is  no evidence about their

using  the  weapons   They  had  dragged  Ayyappu  Reddy

(Deceased No.2) to the back of the jeep.   None of the

eyewitnesses spoke about any attack made by A-10 and A-

15 on Ayyappu Reddy after he was dragged to the back of

the jeep.   As no specific role has been attributed to A-10

and A-15 regarding any attack on any of the deceased, we

do not see any reason to interfere with their acquittal.  A-

16 to A-37, according to the evidence of the eyewitnesses,

were armed with hunting sickles,  iron pipes and bombs.

24

They attacked Rami Reddy (Deceased No.3) and hacked

him indiscriminately.  PW-1, PW-3, PW-5 to PW-7 deposed

that all of them were having sickles and iron pipes.  PW-2

volunteered to state in his evidence that A-17, A-23, A-25,

A-27, A-29 to A-37 were armed with bombs.   A-16, A-18, A-

24 and A-26 were armed with iron pipes and sticks.  He

categorically stated in his evidence that Rami Reddy did

not  receive  any  injury  by  the  bomb  and  that  he  was

hacked  with  iron  pipes,  hunting  sickles  and  sticks.    A

perusal  of  the  injury  certificate  of  Rami  Reddy  would

disclose that the following injuries were found on his body:-

“On the body of a male aged about 60 yeas moderately built and moderately nourished and the following injuries are found:

1. There is amputation of right forearm on the lower 3rd with both bones are cut and the hand is separated.

2. An incised injury of about 1” x ¼” fracture of frontal bone on the right side.

3. An incised injury of about 4” x 2” x bone deep on the right side of face.  

4. An incised injury of about 2” x 1” x fracture mandible in the middle.

5. An incised injury of about 2” x ½” x middle deep 1” lateral to the right eye.

6. An incised injury of about 3” x 2” x fracture of right humeral head.  

7. An incised injury of about 1” ½” x muscle deep on the upper and of right scapula.

8. An incised injury of about 8” x ¼” x facture scapula vertically placed on the right side.  

9. An incised injury of about 1” x ¼” x skin deep ½” below the right eye.  

10.An incised injury of about ½” x ¼” x skin deep on the front side of upper part of right shoulder.  

11.There is tattooing present over the abdomen and lower limbs with splinters.  

25

12.An incised injury of about ½” x ¼” x skin deep on the left side of nose.  

13.An abrasion of 2” x 2” in size on the left knee.  14.An abrasion of about 3” x 2” in size on the right knee.  15.An incised injury of about 6” x ½” x bone deep on the occipital

region with fracture.

All the injuries are ante mortem in nature.     Opinion as to cause of death: The deceased would appear to have died on multiple injuries and due to  fracture  of  skull  and  due  to  shock  and hemorrhage 6-8 hours prior to post mortem.”

15.  As  stated  above  PW-1,  PW-3,  PW-5  to  PW-7  have

deposed that  all  the Accused i.e.  A-16 to A-37 attacked

Rami Reddy and hacked him with iron pipes and hunting

sickles.   In  view  of  the  deposition  of  PW-2  who  came

forward to state that A-17, A-23, A-25, A-27, A-29 to A-37

were armed with bombs and that Rami Reddy’s death was

not  caused  by  any  bomb  would  disclose  that  the  said

accused who were carrying bombs are not responsible for

the death of Rami Reddy.   The injury certificate issued by

PW-18 is in tune also impugned with the evidence of PW-2.

There are 11 incisions on the body of Rami Reddy which

were  caused by hunting sickles  and iron pipes.   Except

some splinter injury over the abdomen and his leg, there is

no  serious  injury  caused  to  Rami  Reddy  by  a  bomb.

Several bombs were thrown during the attack which could

26

have caused the splinter injuries.    On consideration of the

oral evidence of PW-2 and the medical opinion of PW-18,

we are of the considered view that A-17, A-23, A-25, A-27,

A-29 to A-37 are also entitled for the benefit of doubt.   We

uphold their acquittal as recorded by the High Court.  A-16,

A-18 to A-22, A-26 and  A-28 who were armed with hunting

sickles and iron pipes are liable to be convicted for causing

the death of Rami Reddy in view of the testimony of PW-1

to PW-3, PW-5 to PW-7 and the medical opinion given by

PW-18 which corroborates the oral evidence.       

16.   In  view  of  the  above,  the  acquittal  of  Seema

Govinda  Reddy(A-6),   Sura  Sreedhar  Reddy(A-9),  Vadde

Gunja Venkatasubbadu(A-10),  Kasireddy Bhupal Reddy(A-

11),  Kasireddy  Vasantha  Kumar  Reddy(A-12),  Bathula

Pranamananda Reddy(A-14), Vadde Pallapu Jambula(A-15),

Bathula Sankar Reddy (A-17), Mulla Hassan Peera (A-23),

Murasani Sudersana Reddy(A-25), Vadde Sindesudu(A-27),

Vadde  Gittannagari  Chinna  Subbarayudu(A-29),  Vadde

Rameshudu(A-30),  Murasani  Venkatswara  Reddy(A-31),

Golla Chinna Saibaba(A-32), Seema Chenchi Reddy(A-33),

Telugu  Sankaraiah(A-34),  Vadde  Gittannagari  Kotturu

27

Chinna  Sabbadu(A-35),  Vaddegittannagari  Kothuru

Subbarayudu (A-36),  Bathula Venkateswara Reddy(A-37),

Vadde  Koppugadu  @  Sreeramulu  (A-38),  Vadde  Pedda

Venkateswarlu  (A-40),  Kasireddy  Venkateswar  Reddy  (A-

41),  as  recorded  by  the  High  Court  is  upheld  for  the

reasons mentioned above. In view of the affirmation of the

acquittal  of  Murasani  Sudersana  Reddy(A-25),  it  is  not

necessary for us to deal with the point pertaining to his

being a minor.         

17. Pullagummi  Kasireddy  Krishna  Reddy(A-13),

Kondapuram  Narayana  Reddy(A-16),  Vade  Malesh(A-18),

Yedula Rami Reddy(A-19), Perugu Pedda Venkateswarlu(A-

20),  Mulla  Sha  Hussaini(A-21),  Mulla  Moula  Peera(A-22),

Vade  Hanumanna  (A-26),  Vadde  Venkatesu(A-28)  are

convicted  of  the  offence  punishable  under  Section  302

I.P.C.  and  sentenced  to  undergo  life  imprisonment.  The

above Accused are directed to surrender within a period of

four  weeks  from  today.   The  appeals  are  disposed  of

accordingly.    

               .......................................J.                                                             [S.A. BOBDE]

28

               .......................................J.                                                  [L. NAGESWARA RAO]

New Delhi, July 3, 2018  

29