THAMMINENI BHASKAR versus THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

Citation: [2025] 9 S.C.R. 1064 · Decided: 17-09-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: PANKAJ MITHAL · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 9 S.C.R. 1064 : 2025 INSC 1124
Thammineni Bhaskar 
v. 
The State of Andhra Pradesh
(Criminal Appeal No. 4623 of 2024)
17 September 2025
[Pankaj Mithal* and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the 
courts below convicting and sentencing the appellant u/ss.302, 364 
and 201 IPC for kidnapping and murder of the informant’s son.
Headnotes†
Penal Code, 1860 – ss.302, 364 and 201 – Kidnapping and 
murder – FIR by the father that a day before the incident, the 
appellant and his friends forcibly took his son in their auto 
and kidnapped him and the next day, he was found dead with 
multiple injuries – Animosity between the parties on account 
of the previous report lodged by the mother of the deceased 
against the appellant – Conviction of the appellant u/ss.302, 
364 and 201 for kidnapping and murder of the informant’s son 
and was sentenced accordingly – Order upheld by the High 
Court – Correctness:
Held: Animosity between the parties may be the motive behind 
the crime but not sufficient to prove the commission of the crime 
unless the evidence proves kidnapping/abduction and killing of the 
deceased, either by direct or circumstantial evidence – Prosecution 
witness did not utter a single word so as to prove the kidnapping 
as alleged or even that the deceased was with them at any point 
of time in the evening of fateful day – Only that there was some 
‘galata’ under the banyan tree was proved but were unable to 
identify the persons involved in it – They failed to testify that any 
information was given by them to the father regarding the alleged 
kidnapping of the deceased – In the absence thereof and the fact 
that both prosecution witnesses have turned hostile, it cannot be 
held that the appellant was involved in the incident and that was 
responsible for the killing of the deceased, on the basis of the last 
seen theory – No evidence to either prove the kidnapping of the 
* Author
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 
1065
Thammineni Bhaskar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
deceased or that he was last seen in the company of the appellant – 
Keeping in mind the five golden principles, the panchsheel of the 
proof of a case based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution 
miserably failed to prove the commission of the offence at the hands 
of the appellant – Courts below erred in convicting the appellant 
on complete misreading of the evidence – Thus, the impugned 
judgments and orders set aside. [Paras 11-15]
List of Acts
Penal Code, 1860.
List of Keywords
Kidnapping; Murder; Dead with multiple injuries; Animosity; Motive; 
Circumstantial evidence; Hostile; Last seen theory; Five golden 
principles-panchsheel of the proof of a case; Misreading of the 
evidence.
Case Arising From
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 
4623 of 2024
From the Judgment and Order dated 19.06.2024 of the High Court 
of Andhra Pradesh at Amravati in CRLA No. 457 of 2019
Appearances for Parties
Advs. for the Appellant:
K. K. Mani, Ms. T. Archana.
Advs. for the Respondent:
Ms. Prerna Singh, Guntur Pramod Kumar, Dhruv Yadav, 
Ms. Vanshika Singh.
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Judgment
Pankaj Mithal, J.
1.	
The appellant who is Accused No.1(‘A-1’) was convicted under 
Sections 302 and 364 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and was 
sentenced to life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and 
1066
[2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
seven years of rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000/- under 
Section 201 of the IPC with the direction that both the sentences 
shall run concurrently. In the event of default in payment of the fine, 
he was directed to undergo further imprisonment of six months.
2.	
The aforesaid judgment and order of conviction and sentence have 
been confirmed by the High Court by the impugned Judgment and 
order dated 19.06.2024.
3.	
The prosecution case is that the deceased Bhoominadhan was 
an auto driver. The family of the deceased consisting of his father 
Rajagopal Vellimalai @ Peddodu-PW-1 and his mother-PW-2 along 
with elder brother-PW-3 were living in Chandrababu Nagar, Nellore. 
The appellant-A-1 was known to them as he was also involved in 
auto business, but was living in Sramika Nagar, Nellore.
4.	
It appears that on 22.03.2016, the mother of the deceased-PW-2 
reported to the Nellore Rural Police, that A-1 along with his friends 
while sitting near Vinayaka Temple in Chandrababu Nagar Area was 
passing obscene

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