LexSINGAPAGU ANJAIAH versus STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
(2010] 7 S.C.R. 703 SINGAPAGU ANJAIAH v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Criminal Appeal No. 1166 of 2010) JULY 6, 2010 [G.S. SINGHVI AND C.K. PRASAD, JJ.) Penal Code, 1860 - s.302,.... Death due to assault on head with a crow bar - Conviction of accused-appellant u/ A B s. 302 - Justification of - Held: Justified - Appellant chose C crow bar as the weapon of offence - He further chose a vital part of the body i.e. head for causing the injury which had caused multiple fractures of skull - This clearly shows the- force with which appellant had used the weapon - The cumulative effect of all these factors irresistibly lead to the D conclusion that appellant intended to cause death of the victim. Eight accused including the appellant were put on trial for the offences of rioting, attempt to commit murder, E murder and causing hurt. The offences were allegedly committed by the accused persons in view of their previous enmity with the prosecution party. According to the prosecution, while PWs 1 to 5 sustained various injuries on their person, one person F died when appellant-accused hit him with a crow bar on his head. In the opinion of the autopsy surgeon, death had occurred due to laceration over the vertex of the scalp and multiple skull fractures. The trial Court sentenced all the accused for offence under Section 3021149. However, on appeal, the conviction of all the accused except the appellant under Section 302/149 IPC was set aside by the High Court. G 703 H 704 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 7 S.C.R. A Hence the present appeal. Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: In the present case, all the injured witnesses namely PWs 1 to 5 have consistently stated that the B appellant assaulted the deceased with a crow bar on his head. As nobody can enter into the mind of the accused, its intention has to be gathered from the weapon used, the part.of the body chosen for the assault and the nature of the injuries caused. Here, the appellant had chosen a C crow bar as the weapon of offence. He has further chosen a vital part of the body i.e. head for causing the injury which had caused multiple fractures of skull. This clearly shows the force with which the appellant had used the weapon. The cumulative effect of all these factors D irresistibly lead to one and the only conclusion that the appellant intended to cause death of the deceased. [Paras 15, 16] [709-G-H; 710-A-C] Gurmai/ Singh & others v. State of Punjab (1982) 3 SCC E 185; Jagtar Singh v. State of Punjab (1983) 2 SCC 342 and Gurmukh Singh v. State of Haryana (2009) 15 SCC 635, distinguished. F Case Law Reference: (1982) 3 sec 185 (1983) 2 sec 342 (2009) 15 sec 635 distinguished distinguished distinguished Para 10 Para 11 Para 12 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal G No. 1166 of 2010. H From the Judgment & Order dated 31.3.2008 of the High Court of Judicature Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Crl. Appeal No. 611 of 2006. SINGAPAGU ANJAIAH v. STATE OF ANDHRA 705 PRADESH A.T.M. Rangaramanujam, Anu Gupta, Gouri K. Das, Rani A Jethmalani for the Appellant. D. Bharathi Reddy for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by B C.K. PRASAD, J. 1. The sole petitioner, aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 31.03.2008 passed by the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Criminal Appeal No.611 of 2006 affirming the judgment and order dated 6.4.2006 passed by the II Additional Sessions Judge (Fast C Track Court}, Mahabubnagar in Sessions Case No. 175 of 2003, has preferred this petition for grant of special leave to appeal. 2. Leave granted. 3. Altogether eight persons, including the appellant were put on trial for various offences punishable under Section 148, 307/149, 302, 302/149 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code. D 4. The appellant, in particular, was charged for offences E of rioting, attempt to commit murder of S. Ramulu (PW.1 ), murder of S. Ramalingam and causing hurt to S. Ramchandriah (PW.5), punishable under Section 148, 307, 302 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code respectively. The trial court acquitted all . the accused persons for the offence under Section 307/149 of F the Indian Penal Code but sentenced all of them for offence under Section 148, 324/149 and 302/149 and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302/149 and rigorous imprisonment for nine months for the offence under Section
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.