MULLAGIRI VAIRAM AND ORS. versus STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

Citation: [1992] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 19 · Decided: 15-10-1992 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: KULDIP SINGH · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

MULLAGIRI VAIRAM AND ORS. 
v. 
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH 
OCTOBER 15, 1992 
[KULDIP SINGH AND N.M. KASLIWAL, JJ.] 
Criminal Law : 
Indian Penal Code, 1860 : 
Sections 149 and 302-Murder-Conviction of the accused-Confirma-
tion of by High Court-whether valid-Identification of accused-Reliance 
placed on evidence of eye-witness of-Whether proper-Name of one of the 
accused not mentioned in Statements recorded either under Section 164 Cr. 
P.C. or at the inquest-Whether accused entitled to benefit of doubt. 
Twelve persons, including the appellants, were challaned for the 
murder of Sarpanch of a village. Relying on the evidence of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 
7 in toto and that of P.w.3 to some extent, the Sessions Judge convicted 
all the accused persons for the offences under Section 302 read with 
Section 149 I.P.C. and awarded sentence of imprisonment for life and 
other minor ~erms of imprisonment for _other offences. 
On appeal, the High Court set aside the conviction and sentence of 
seven accused persons, namely, A-4, A-5, A-8 to 12 and confirmed the 
conviction of the remaining live accused persons, A-1 to A-3, A-6 and A-7 
under Section 302 read with Section 149 I.P.C. and sentenced them to 
imprisonment for life. 
These live accused filed an appeal, by special leave, before this 
Court. During the pendency of the appeal one of the accused-appellants 
died and as such appeal filed by him was dismissed as having abated. 
On behalf of the accused persons it was submitted that even if the 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
statement of P.W.2 was taken to be correct no offence was made out so far as 
accused A-3 was concerned, inasmuch as P.W .2 had admitted in the cross-ex-
amination that he did not state the name of A-3 in his statement recorded 
under Section 164 Cr. P.C., and that the name of A-3 was also not found In 
Exhibit D-7, the statement of P.W.2 recorded at the inquest, and that since H 
19 
20 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1992] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 
A 
P.W .2 bad gone to police station seven or eight times after the incident, there 
was a possibility of his seeing the accused, A·2 and A-7 in the police lock-up 
and hence the identification parades held had no value. 
Disposing of the appeal, this Court, 
B 
HELD: 1.1. There is no infirmity at all in the reasoning and con-
clusions arrived at by the High Court so far as accused A-1, A-2 and A-7 
are concerned. (24-8] 
1.2. It is established beyond any manner of doubt that there were two 
C factions and long standing rivalry in between the two groups in the village. 
The accused persons belonged to the group headed by A-6, A-7 and the 
deceased was the leader of the other group. The deceased was given 
merciless beatings and was done to death in the midnight. He was found 
to have 26 external injuries as recorded in the autopsy of his dead body 
conducted by the Doctor. It bas also been found established by the trial 
D court as well as by the High Court that A-1 inflicted injuries by an axe and 
A-2 by a spear and A-7 was among the other persons who inflicted injuries 
by a stick. It has also come in the evidence of P.W. 19, Inspector of Police, 
that the accused persons had absconded and after a few days of the 
incident, on information, he, along with mediators, visited the village and 
E the absconded accused were hiding in the house of A-7. He surrounded the 
house with his staff, guarded it and found therein, the twelve persons 
against whom the case was challaned. It has also been proved by the 
prosecution that A-7 was the leader of the rival faction against the 
deceased. (23-F-H, 24-A] 
F 
1.3. The High Court ltas considered the prosecution evidence in 
detail and has placed reliance on the statements of P.Ws.l to 4 as eye-wit-
nesses of the incident. The High Court has placed implicit reliance on the 
testimony of P.W .2. a clerk in the deceased's office, and who had accom-
panied the deceased in an autorickshaw and seen the incident. There is no 
G infirmity in the statement of P.W.2 and the High Court has rightly placed 
reliance on his evidence. (22-D, E] 
1.4. P.W .2 himself admitted at the time of holding the identification 
parade that he had prior acquaintance with A-2 and A-7. P.W.2 is a 
witness of sterling worth and both the trial court and the High Court have 
H placed reliance on his testimony. He had identified A-1, A-2 and A-7 in the 
MULLAGJRI VAJRAM v. STATE OF A.P. [KASLIWAL. J.] 
21 
Court. Their conviction is not based on the identification parade but on A 
th

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