IRLAPATI SUBBAYYA versus THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ANDHRA PRADESH

Citation: [1974] 3 S.C.R. 602 · Decided: 14-03-1974 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M. HAMEEDULLAH BEG · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

602 
IRLAPATJ 
SUBBAYYA 
v. 
THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ANDHRA PRADESH 
March 
I 4, I 974 
[M.H. BEG AND Y.V. CHANDRACHUD, JJ.) 
Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act 1910-
Appea/ again.rt acquittal-Duty of the High Court while in~erfering with the acquittal. 
The appellant was charged for offences punishable under sections 302, 32S and 
323 read with sec. 34 of the J.P.C. along with three others. The Sessions Court acquitt· 
ed the appellant. The High Court set aside the acquittal and convicted the appellant 
upon the plea of the appellant that the Hi~h Court had erred in its appreciation of 
evidence. The Court went through the entrre record for itself as the appellant had 
.approached the Court under the Criminal Jurisdiction newJy created. 
Allowing the appeal, 
HEW : (I) That1 the conviction by the High Court was not based on complete 
er comprehensive 21ppreciation of all features of the case, which, taken together 
·cast a reasonable doubt on the prosecution version. There was CJnsiderable uncer-
tainty .about the time and the place at which the incident took place. The evidence 
of the witnesses that there was considerable bleeding from the injury of the deceased 
was inconsistent with total absence of blood at the place of occurrence. The pro-
secution tried to prove that there were 3 blows struck on the head of the deceased, 
but this was not supported by the medical evidence. [b06C; BJ 
(JI) Held further that the High Court failed to attach due weight to the assess-
ment of evidence by the trial court which had the additional advantage of seeing 
the witnes.scs depose in the witness box. {606D] 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 229 of 
1970. 
From the judgment and order dated the 29th September, 1970 of 
the Andbra Pradesh High Court at Hyderabad in Criminal Appeal 
No. 891 of 1969. 
K. T. Harindranati and G. S. Rama Rao, for the appellant. 
P. Ram Reddy and P. P. Rao, for the respondent. 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
The Judgement of the Court was delivered by 
F 
BEG J.-The appellant was charged, with his three brothers-in-Jaw, 
Bayyarapu Butchiah, Bayyarapu Chandriah, and Bayya1apu Kotayya 
for offences punisbhable under Section 302, 325, and 323 Indian Penal 
Code each read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code, for having murdered 
Irlapati Ramayya aRd causing grievous hurt to Ankayya, P.W. 2, and 
simple injury to China Veerayya, P.W. I, at about 4.30 p.m., on 15-6-69, 
G 
in front of house of Vipparla Peda Veerayya in Village Vipparla. Dis-
trict Guntur in the State of Andhra Pradesh. They were .tried and 
acquitted by the learned Sessions' Judge of Guntur who attached 
considerable importance to the supposed delay in lodging the First 
Information Report of the alleged occurrence af 10.30 p.m. on 15-6-69 
at Police Station, Sattonapalli, 13 miles away from the scene of the 
incident. The prosecution had a sufficiently good explanation for the 
H 
supposed delay inasmuch as the wife and other relations of the deceased 
were busy trying to gt! adequate medical attention for the deceased 
before thinking of making the F.J.R. The High Court had, on an 
A 
B 
c 
:<:t 
'"I w 
ta " 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
IRLAPATI v. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (Beg,/.) 
(;03 
appeal to it, C·)nsidered this and other questions involved in the case 
and convicted and sentenced the appellant under Section 302 to life 
imprisonment and awarded other appropriate sentences under Sections 
325 and 323 I.P.C. to him. The High Court had convicted the three 
other co-accused under Sections 323 and 324 I.P.C. only and had 
sentenced them to a fine of Rs. 150/- only, and, in default of payment 
Df fine, to three months rigorous 
imprisonment. Consequently, 
the appellant, had his right to appeal to this Court against the reversal 
of the order of his acquittal. The co-accused, Mt being in that advan-
tageous position, could not obtain any special leave to appeal. 
As this is an appeal, in exercise of a newly created right of appeal 
to this Coµrt, we have examined the evidence on record. The points 
raised on behalfof the appellant, on this evidence, are mentioned below. 
Firstly, it is pointed out that P.W.I, P.W. 2, P.W. 3, and P.W. 4, 
as well as P.W. 10, and P.W. 11, are relations of the deceased; highly 
interested in securing the convictions of the appellant on account of 
partisanship. It was urged that P.W. 5 and P.W. 6," were wrongly 
treated as alleged "independent witnesses" by the High Court. It 
\Vas suggested

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.