Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 15
PETITIONER:
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
DR. M.V. RAMANA REDDY AND ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT14/08/1991
BENCH:
AHMADI, A.M. (J)
BENCH:
AHMADI, A.M. (J)
PUNCHHI, M.M.
CITATION:
1991 AIR 1938 1991 SCR (3) 600
1991 SCC (4) 536 JT 1991 (3) 421
1991 SCALE (2)337
ACT:
Indian Penal Code--Sections 148, 302 and 324--Acquittal
of accused--Whether valid and proper on the evidence ad-
duced.
Delay in holding identification parade--Effect of.
HEADNOTE:
One Ram Subba Reddy, an advocate, politician and a
tradeunionist, was murdered on the night between 14th and
15th April, 1975, at his house in Proddatur, when the de-
ceased is stated to have received fatal blows by lethal
weapons whilst his daughter (PW 1), sleeping nearby received
injuries when she attempted to go to help her father. Ac-
cording to the prosecution, Accused No. 1 (Respondent No.
1), was a friend and a regular visitor to the house of the
deceased, till they fell out on account of trade union
activities. Accused No. 1 was the President of the workmen’s
unions of Andhra Cotton Mills, Proddatur, International
Packaging Company, Proddotur and Transport Workers, espous-
ing the cause of workmen and directing their union activi-
ties while the deceased, a practising Advocate represented
the managements of these companies and tendered legal advice
to them in connection with the various labour problems
arising in those companies. The deceased who was a lawyer
for the companies had advised the accused No. 1 not to
resort to violence for settlement of industrial disputes.
The fact that infuriated accused No.’ 1 further was the help
which the deceased agreed to provide to PW 11 for setting up
an office of INTUC in his own office. This was intended to
counter the militant activities of Accused 1 who was in
control of most of the labour unions in the town.
According to the prosecution at about 3.30 a.m. on the
day of occurrence, PW 1 who was sleeping on the terrace of
the house nearby her father, woke up bearing the cries of
her father ans saw accused 1 with 6 or 7 others stabbing her
father with daggers. She raised an alarm and tried to go to
rescue her father but she was prevented by three of them
from getting up; accused No. 3 had gagged her mouth with his
hand and had pinned her down to the cot. Thereafter accused
5 tried to stab her with a dagger twice but on both the
occasions she warded off the blows and in the process sus-
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 15
tained injuries on her left index finger,
601
thumb and palm extending to another finger. After the as-
sailants left, she got down and informed her mother PW 2
about the incident; she opened the door to PWs 3 and 4, who
were sleeping outside. She sent a message to the police
through PW S, her neighbour, as telephone lines were cut.
The police took up investigation and 19 persons including
the respondents were put up for trial before the Additional
Sessions Judge, Cuddapah on different charges e.g. criminal
conspiracy, rioting and murder, etc. The learned trial judge
came to ie conclusion that the prosecution had failed to
establish the Charge of criminal conspiracy under Section
120B, I.P.C. It accepted the testimony of PWs 1to 5 and held
(i) that the incident occurred at 3.30 a.m. on the terrace
of the residence of the deceased; (ii) the injuries borne on
the fingers of PW 1 were not self-inflicted as suggested by
defence and (iii) that the intimation of the incident was
the police without loss of time. Accordingly the trial Judge
convicted Accused Nos. 1 and 3 under Sections 148 and 302
and Sec. 324 with the aid of Section 149, I.P.C. and accused
No. S under Section: 148, 302 and 324, I.P.C. and sentenced
all the three to life imprisonment for murdering Ram Subba
Reddy and to rigorous imprisonment for 3 years under section
148, IPC. The other 16 accused were acquitted. The convicted
persons appealed to the High Court and the State filed an
application for enhancement of the sentence imposed on
Accused No. 1 to capital punishment. The High Court allowed
the appeal by the convicted persons and acquitted them.
Hence this appeal by the State against the order of acquit-
tal, by special leave. The High Court bold that the evidence
of PW 1 is tainted in that the names of accused 2 and 4 who
were strangers to her figure in her statement Exh. P-1 and
further her statement regarding identity of Accused 3 and S
was unacceptable. The High Court therefore found the evi-
dence led by the prosecution untrustworthy. and thus acquit-
ted the accused appellants before it.
Partly allowing the appeal, this Court,
HELD: On the question of presence of PW 1 in Proddatur
on the date of the incident, apart from the oral evidence of
PWs 1 to 3 and 5, there is the documentary evidence in the
form of the entry Ex. S6 recorded by PW 24 in the general
diary on April 15, 1975 at about 4-30 a.m. That entry was
made on the information supplied by PW 5. It is clearly
stated therein by PW S that he had been told by PW 1 that
her father was murdered at his residence. It was on receipt
of this information that the police went to the house of the
deceased, drew up the inquest report and recorded the state-
ments of those present there including PW 1. The presence of
PW 1 is, therefore clearly established
602
by this document prepared within an hour from the time of
the incident. This contemperaneous document corroborates the
oral evidence of the aforesaid witnesses. [614A.C]
The High Court failed to realise that when an injury is
on an accessible part of the body, which the individual can
himself reach, such an injury could also be self-inflicted
and when a medical witness is asked if it was possible to
self-inflict it he would have to answer in the affirmative
unless the direction of the injury or such other factors
show otherwise. But merely because the medical officer says
that they could be self-inflicted, there is no reason to
jump to such a conclusion unless. circumstances establish
such a possibility. In the present case there was hardly any
opportunity to self-inflict them. Her not being a left
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 15
hander should make no difference because she is bound to use
that hand to ward off the blows if her assailant is on that
side of her bed. The High Court was not justified in con-
cluding that PW 1 had self inflicted the wounds found on her
left hand. This conclusion of the High Court is, to say the
least, wholly conjectural and totally against the weight of
evidence on record. [615F-616A]
Once it is accepted that PW 1 had slept on the terrace
and had sustained the injuries in the incident, her evidence
regarding the identity of accused No. 1 who was quite well
known to her cannot be doubted. [616G]
The evidence of PW1 is that when she heard the cries of
her father she woke up and saw accused No. 1 and six or
seven others belabouring him. This means that she did not
know and could not identify the companions of accused No. 1.
However, when she tried to raise an alarm three of the
assailants approached her and pinned her down to the bed,
and one of them threatened to stab her. He did carry out his
threat as is evidenced from the injuries sustained by her.
She was able to identify two of them at the identification
parade held on May 23, 1975. This is proved through the
evidence of PW 14 who conducted the test identification
parades. Now accused Nos. 3 and S had surrendered before the
Court on May 13, 1975. PW 14 received the requisition for
arranging a test identification parade on May 17, 1975.the
identification parade was actually held on May 23, 1975
There is no valid explanation tendered by the prosecution
for the delay in holding the identification parades. The
High Court was reluctant to place absolute reliance on the
evidence of PW 1 regarding the identity of accused Nos. 3
and 5. In the absence of a valid explanation for the delay,
the Court did not think that this approach of the High Court
can be said to be manifestly wrong to call for intervention.
[617A-E]
603
The Court, in the result, partly allowed the appeal in
so far as it related to original Accused No. 1-respondent
No. 1 set aside the High Court’s order acquitting him and
restored the order of trial Judge convicting and sentencing
him. The Court affirmed the High Court’s order of acquittal
passed in respect of other accused, giving them the benefit
of doubt. [617E-G]
State of Jammu and Kashmir v. Hazara Singh & Anr.,
[1980] , Suppl. SCC 641, referred to.
JUDGMENT:
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 7
of 1979.
From the Judgment and Order dated 13.2.1978 of the
Andhra Pradesh High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 812 of 1976
and 807 of 1977.
K. MadhaVa Reddy, TVSN.Chari, Narashima P.V.P.L. and Ms.
M. Gupta for the Appellant.
R.K. Garg, T. Rama Mohan Raj, N.M. popli and V.J. Fran-
cis for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
AHMADI, J. Ram Subba Reddy, an advocate, politician’ (an
ex-MLA) cum trade unionist was done to death when he was
sleeping on the terrace of his house in Proddatur, District
Cuddapah, on the night ’between 14th and 15th April, 1975.
The incident in question occurred at about 3.30 a.m. in
which, apart from the deceased Ram Subba Reddy having re-
ceived fatal blows by lethal weapons, his daughter PW 1
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 15
Krishnaveni, aged about 24 years, received injuries when she
attempted to ’go to help her father. As many as 19 persons
were put up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Cuddapah on different charges. Original accused Nos.
1 and 7 to 19 were charged for criminal conspiracy under
section 120B; original accused Nos. 1 to 6, 12 and 13 were
charged for rioting with deadly weapons under section 148;
original accused No. 16 was charged under section 147 along
with original accused Nos. 1 to 6, 12 and 13; original
accused Nos. 1 to 6, 12 and 13 were also charged for murder
under section 302; the said accused alongwith original
accused No. 16 were also charged under section 302/149;
original accused No. 5 was charged under section 324 and he
as well as original accused Nos. 1 to
604
4, 6, 12, 13 and 16 were charged under Section 324/149,
I.P.C. To bring home the charges against them the prosecu-
tion mainly relied on the testimony of PW 1 Krishnaveni, PW
2 Venkata Subbamma, widow of the deceased, PW 3, Venkat Rami
Reddy and PW 4 Kasireddy sambasiva Reddy, both of whom it is
claimed were sleeping on the ground floor of the house of
the deceased and PW 5 Annapu Reddy Venkata Subba Reddy, a
neighbour who arrived at the scene of incident on hearing
the commotion and who at the instance of PW 1 lodged the FIR
Exh. P-56 at about 4.30 a.m. The learned Additional Sessions
Judge accepted the evidence of PWs 1, 2, 3 and 5, PW 4
having turned hostile, and convicted original accused Nos. 1
and 3 under section 148 and section 302 and 324 with the aid
of section 149, I.P.C. and original accused’ No. 5 under
sections 148, 302 and 324, I.P.C., substantively. All the
three of them were sentenced to life imprisonment for mur-
dering Ram Subba Reddy and to rigorous imprisionment for 3
years under section 148, I.P.C. No separate sentence was
imposed for causing injuries to PW 1. The rest were acquit-
ted of all the charges levelled against them. No appeal was
preferred to the High Court against their acquittal but the
three convicted accused preferred an appeal to the High
Court challenging their conviction while the State appealed
for enhancement of the sentence of accused No. 1 from life
imprisonment to capital punishment. The High Court doubted
the testimony of PWs 1, 2, 3 and 5 and their capacity to
identify the assailants and, therefore, acquitted them of
all the charges levelled against them. Consequently the
State’s appeal for enhancement of accused No. 1’s sentence
also failed. While the State has preferred this appeal
against the order of acquittal or’ original accused Nos. 1,
3 and 5, no appeal has been preferred against the dismissal
of he State’s appeal for enhancement of the accused No. 1’s
sentence. A few facts leading to this appeal may be noticed.
The deceased was a practising lawyer and a congressman. He
was member of the Legislative Assembly during the 1967 ,1972
term. He had his own house in which he resided. AcCused No.
1, a medical practitioner, was a trade union activist be-
longing to the Communist party of India (Marxist-Leninist
group) and weilded considerable influence among the working
classes. Accused No. 2 was a lower division clerk in the
judicial department, District Cuddapah, but was on cave at
the material time. He was a close associate of accused
No..1. Accused Nos. 3 and 5 were employees of Andhra Cotton
Mills, Proddatur, while accused Nos. 4 and 6 were employees
of International Packaging Company, Proddatur, and took part
in trade union activities. In the first quarter of 1974 the
workers of the International Packaging Com-
.
605
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 15
pany had served the management with a charter of demands and
accused No. 1, who was the President of the Union had served
the management with a strike notice on the’ failure of the
negotiations which the management countered by declaring a
lock-out. Thereafter PW 21 Jutura Ramaniah partner of the
company was assaulted on the night of March 30, 1974 for
which a case was registered against accused No. 1 and his
companions. The deceased who was a lawyer for the company is
stated to have advised accused No. 1 not to resort to vio-
lence for settlement of such industrial disputes. As the
deceased was representing the company the relations between
the deceased and accused No. 1 which were cordial were
soured and the latter stopped visiting the former. In the
month of November 1974, on the advise of the deceased, the
management brought workers from Bangalore and started the
factory. However the workers’ union could prevail upon those
workers not to report for. work and the unit again same to a
standstill within about ten days of commencement. The dis-
pute was referred to the arbitration Of three persons but
they could not resolve it on account of the uncompromising
attitude of the workers led by accused No. 1.
While this unrest continued trouble started brewing-with
the transport workers union of which accused No. 1 was the
President striking work. Here too the management was repre-
sented by the deceased. The atmosphere in the township was
surcharged and tense. With the intervention of the State
Minister the dispute between the transport workers and the
owners was settled but so far as the International PaCkaging
Company is concerned its employees did not participate in
the meeting called by the Minister. A warrant for the deten-
tion of accused NO. 1 under MISA was issued on February 14,
1975 but the same could not be executed as he went under-
ground. On the advice of the Minister the management unilat-
erally opened the factory w.e.f. March 19, 1975. The de-
ceased had throughout taken a very active interest in ensur-
ing the starting of the factory notwithstanding the stand
taken by the union. The union had also complained about the
unilateral imposition of certain conditions on the’ workmen
but to no avail. The workers began to report for work though
the union was not reconciled. On the other hand since the
warrant for accused No. 1’s arrest could not be executed a
warrant for the attachment of his properties was issued on
April 9, 1975.
PW 11 M. Sajjana, Assistant Station Master, Cuddapah,
had started an INTUC branch at Cuddapah sometime’ in Decem-
ber, 1973. Under its banner a youth conference was organised
on January 26,
606
1975. PW H presided. over that conference and a decision was
taken explore the possibility of starting an INTUC branch at
Proddatur with the help of the deceased. Pursuant thereto PW
11 and others visited Proddatur on March 27, 1975 to discuss
the matter with the deceased. The deceased promised all
possible help and agreed to provide space for the office of
INTUC in his own office. Ultimately to counter the militant
activities of accused No. 1 who was in control of most of
the labour unions in the town a decision was taken to start
an INTUC branch in Proddatur w.e.f. April 19,1975. Pamphlets
were issued in this behalf soliciting the co-operation ,of
workers and others. This was the last straw on the camel’s
back.
The physical condition of the. place. of occurrence may
be noticed to. appreciate the ocular evidence..The house
faced southward and lay along a public road with open space
in-the front covered by a.compound,wall in the front with no
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 15
such wall on the remaining three sides. In the front was a
verandah and thereafter came the drawing room in which was
installed a telephone. Further to the north was. a room and
beyond that was a hall. Then came another covered verandah
with a tin-sheet sloping roof at a height of about 7 feet
from the ground level. This-was the ground floor accommoda-
tion. The staircase.leading’ to the terrace was situate in
the hall. This staircase opened in a room leading to the
open terrace. This terrace room had an asbestos ’sheet
projection whereunder there was an electric bulb. The ter-
race had a parapet wall all round of the height of about 3
feet. On the south-west side of the terrace room along. the
parapet wall there existed a 24 feet long pial of the.
height of 20 inches and width of 18 inches. A window in the
western wall had a cement shade 4 feet x 2 feet in size,
Adjacent to. that window was a telephone pole hardly five
feet away from the-wall with the upper end hardly 6-1/2
inches from the cement shade. The prosecution case is that
this telephone pole was used by the assailants to launch the
attack on the deceased.
The family of the deceased comprised of his wife PW 2,
two daughters, one of whom was married and lived with her
husband and, the other PW 1 was a medical student, and three
sons none of whom was in town on that day. Pw. 1 was study-
ing in the third year at Kakinada and had come home as the
college was closed from April 12 to April 20, 1975. PW 1
deposed that on the date of the incident after dinner she
and her parents chit-chatted for sometime and thereafter her
father went to the terrace as it Was summer and retired for
the night. She continued to talk with her mother and in the
meantime PWs 3 and 4 arrived. They carried their-beddings to
the verandah and slept
607
there. PW 3 used to sleep at their house since the last
couples of years whereas PW 4 came there occasionally. After
they left for the verandah the witness closed the ’ground
floor door to the house, carried an anatomy book and went to
the terrace to sleep. She read in the terrace light which
was under the asbestos projection and then went to bed on
the cot laid for her keeping the light on as was the usual
practice. Her mother did not sleep on the terrace as she was
not allowed to climb the stairs since she had recently
undergone an operation. Her father was sleeping on the bed
laid on the floor wearing a banian. A hurricane lantern was
also kept lighted on account of frequent power failures. At
about 3.30 a.m. she woke up hearing the cries of her father
and saw accused No. 1 and 6 or 7 others stabbing her father
with daggers. She raised an alarm and tried to go to the
rescue of her father but she was prevented by three of them
from getting up. According to her accused No. 3 had gagged
her mouth with his hand and had pinned her down to the cot.
Thereafter accused No. 5 tried to stab her with a dagger
twice but on both the occasions she warded off the blows and
in the process sustained injuries on her left index finger,
thumb and palm region extending to another finger. Till the
assailants had finished with her father she was pinned down
to her bed and thereafter the assailants went to the west,
climbed the parapet wall and went down the terrace. She then
ran down crying that accused No. 1, whom she knew since
quite sometime, and his companions had killed her father.
She woke up her mother and informed her of what had hap-
pened. On hearing a knock on the main entrance to the house,
she opened the door and found PWs 3 and 4 holding a torch.
On inquiry she told them that accused No. 1 and his compan-
ions had killed her father and she too was injured. She
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 15
learnt from them that they had seen accused No. 1 and 4 or 5
others slide down the telephone pole situated to the west of
the house. She then tried to contact the police on phone but
found that the same was disconnected. Since PW 5 a neighbour
was there she requested him to go tO the police station and
fetch the police. On receipt of information a Sub-Inspector
of police and a few constables arrived by about 5.00 or 5.30
a.m. to whom she narrated the incident whereupon her state-
ment was recorded which has been introduced on record as
Exh. P-1. The Sub-Inspector held the inquest on the dead
body between 7.00 and 10.30 a.m., drew up a panchnama of the
scene of occurrence, attached the anatomy text book and
other blood stained articles from the terrace, including the
electric bulb from the socket of the electric holder on the
terrace, At the identification parade held later she identi-
fied accused Nos. 3 and 5 as the companions of accused No.
1. In cross-examination she’ denied the suggestion that
accused Nos. 3 and 5 were shown to her while they were in
the sub-jail before
608
she was asked to identify them. It transpires from her
cross-examination that the defence case was that she had not
slept on the terrace, that the cut injuries on her left hand
were self-inflicted and that she was falsely implicating
accused Nos. 3 and 5 as they had supported her rival Padma
in a college election when she was in the B.Sc. class. It
was also suggested that photographs of accused. Nos. 3 and 5
were shown to her from a group photo obtained from A.C.
Mills Union Office. It may be mentioned that the suggestions
made to this witness in regard to the identity of accused
Nos. 3 and 5 are self contradictory in the sense that if the
suggestion that she was falsely involving these two accused
because they had helped Padma who contested the election
against her is correct it would follow that they were known
to her since long in which case there would be no need to
point them out to her while they were in the sub-jail or to
show their photographs to her. Suffice it to say that.
nothing very striking, except minor contradictions, has been
elicited in her cross-examination which would shake her
credibility. PW 2, her mother, corroborates her say in
regard to the incident and the involvement of accused No.
1.. PW 3 has deposed that since he and PW 4 anticipated
danger to the life of the deceased on account of the dis-
turbed management-labour relationship they slept at the
house of the deceased. PW 3 states that he saw eight persons
sliding down the telephone pole..Amongst them were accused
Nos. 1 to 5 and S.V. Subbarayadu whom he identified as
accused No. 6. PW 4 has stated that on the date of the
incident he had heard about the murder when he was at his
residence at about 4.30 a.m. He was treated as hostile and
was allowed to be cross-examined by. the prosecution. PW 5,
whose house was only about 100 yards away, deposed that when
he was sleeping on his terrace he heard cries at about 3.30
a.m. and went to the house of the deceased. PWs 1 to 4 were
present there alongwith other. neighbours. PWs 1 and 2
were.weeping while PWs 3 and 4 were trying to console them.
PW 1 asked him to inform the police that her father was
murdered. He then went and informed the police about the
incident and returned with the police to the scene of of-
fence. Thus the evidence of this witness also corroborates
PW 1.
The inquest was!held between 7.00 and 10.30’ a.m. The
statements of PWs 1 to 5 were also recorded and certain
articles were attached from the terrace.These included blood
stained bed-sheets, pillows, towel, shawl, shrit, etc., and
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 15
Cunningham’s text book on. human anatomy which PW 1 was
reading before going to bed. The telephone connection was
found snapped and there were drops of blood from. the place
where the dead body was found till the drawing room down-
stairs where the telephone was: installed which. corrobo-
609
rated the story of PW 1. The banian worn by the deceased,
was blood stained and had cuts corresponding to injuries
found on. the chest of the deceased. Several other articles
found on the person. of the deceased were blood stained.
There were as many as 33 injuries on the person of the
deceased which is clearly indicative of the involvement of a
group of persons in the killing. This stands corroborated by
the post-mortem report. On the cot which was occupied by PW
1 there were blood drops on the bed, bed cover and bed
sheet. The reports of the Chemical Analyser and Serologist,
Exhs. P-18 and P-19. show that all the articles were stained
with human blood. A lantern was burning nearby and the
electric light on the terrace was also on. This inquest
panchnama Exh. P-6 leaves no room for doubt that the inci-
dent occurred on the terrace portion of the residence of the
deceased.
PW 1 was medically examined by the medical officer PW 13
on the same day at about 11.45 a.m. She had incised wounds
on the left index finger 1/2" x 1/4", on the left hand below
tile wrist 1" x 118" x 1/8", on the middle of the left palm
1" x 1/8" x 1/8" and on the little finger of left hand 1/2"
x 1/8" x 1/8". This would indicate that she received these
injuries while trying to ward off the blows.
Identification parades were held on May 23, 1975. In the
first one accused Nos. 7, 10 and 11 were made to stand with
non-suspects, in the second parade accused Nos. 12, 13 and
16 were made to take their positions along with several
others and in the last parade accused Nos.17, 18 and 19 were
concerned. PW 1 could not identify any one from amongst the
said accused persons in all the three parades.Out of the
three parades PW 3 identified all the three accused of the
second parade. In the evening an identification’ parade was
held concerning accused Nos. 2 to 6 and 9. PW 1 could iden-
tify. ’accUsed Nos. 3 and 5 while PW 3 could not identify
any of them.
The defence of all the accused was of total ’denial and
false involvement. In fact accused No. 1 contended that.he
was out of station from May 13, 1975 and learnt of the
murder on his return to Proddatur. When he learnt of his
false involvement he surrendered before the Court. Accused
Nos. 12, 13 and 16contended that they were shown to PW 3
before the identification parade while accused Nos. 3 and 5
pleaded that the police had taken a group photograph in
which they figured from the union office and had shown it to
PW Accused Nos. 7, 11, 14, 15, 17 and 19 were not examined
under section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code as no
evidence incriminating them was tendered on record. No
defence witness came to be examined.
610
The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Cuddapah, came to
the conclusion that the prosecution had failed to establish
the charge of criminal conspiracy under section 120B, I.P.C.
He came to the conclusion that the evidence on record,
however, indicated that accused Nos. 1 to 6 had a direct and
strong motive to kill the deceased and the likelihood of the
others having shared their feelings could not be ruled out
altogether. The direct testimony of PWs 1 to 5 and the other
circumstantial evidence adverted to earlier established
beyond any manner of doubt that the incident occurred at
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 15
3.30 a.m. on the terrace of the residence of the deceased.
The learned Judge held that intimation of the incident was
given to the police without loss of time and PW 1 had lodged
her complaint by about 6.00 a.m. when the police came to the
scene of occurrence alongwith PW 5 who had gone to call
them. The suggestion that injuries found on the person of PW
1 were selfinflicted or that PW 2 was giving false evidence
as she was promised financial help to the tune of Rs.
1,50,000 were brushed aside by the learned Judge as totally
imaginary ,and unfounded. The learned Judge, however, did
not treat PW 1’s complaint EXh. P-1 as admissible in evi-
dence as he came to the conclusion that it was hit by sec-
tion 162 of the Code since information regarding the inci-
dent had reached the police station through PW 5. The
learned trial Judge, therefore, accepted the evidence of PWs
1, 2, 3 and 5 as reliable and convicted them as stated
earlier while acquitting their companions.
The said three convicted accused preferred an appeal,
being Criminal Appeal No. 812 of 1976, in the High Court.
,State also preferred an appeal for awarding capital punish-
ment to accused No. 1, being Criminal Appeal No. 807 of
1976. The State’s appeal came to be dismissed and that is
where the matter rests. However, the appeal by the convicted
accused came to be allowed and the appellants were acquit-
ted. It is against the said order of acquittal that the
State has approached this Court by way of special leave. It
would, therefore, be proper to ascertain the grounds on
which the impugned order of the High Court is founded.
The High Court came to the conclusion that the complaint
of PW 1 was not recorded at the time it purports to have
been for if it were so it would not have reached the con-
cerned Magistrate as late as 1.40 p.m. In that case even the
inquest report Exh. P-6 would not have been delayed till
10.55 p.m. The explanation for the delay found in Exh. P-25
cannot be accepted at its face value. The evidence of PW 1
is tainted, in that, although she knew accused No. 1 as he
visited her father quite often the rest of the assailants
were total strangers and yet
611
the names of accused Nos. 2 and 4 appear in her statement
Exh. P-1 which goes to show that she was tutored into giving
their names. That according to the High Court raises a
serious doubt regarding her trustworthiness. On the question
of identity of accused Nos. 3 and 5, the High Court points
out that even before the identification parade she had told
the Magistrate that she would be able to identify only two
persons and later pointed an accusing finger at accused Nos.
3 and 5 at the identification parade. This, says the High
Court, reinforces the defence version that she was shown the
group photo before she was called to identify the accused
persons. The identification parade was delayed upto May 23,
1975 as till then the photograph was not secured by the
police. In the circumstances the High Court did not find the
evidence of PW 1 regarding the identity of accused Nos. 3
and 5 acceptable. The High Court also held that the injuries
on the left hand of PW 1 were in all probability self-in-
flicted, more so because she is not a left-hander. So also
the absence of blood stains on the bed lying on the floor of
the terrace casts a serious doubt regarding her version of
the incident. The High Court found the prosecution story
that the electric light as well as the kerosene lamp were
kept on throughout the night rather unusual. In this view of
the evidence, the High Court did not consider PW 1 a truth-
ful witness. As regards PW 3 the High Court found his ver-
sion that he slept at the residence of the deceased since
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 15
sometime unacceptable. It also noticed that PW 3 claimed to
know accused Nos. 1 to 6 by their names and he gave out
those names to the police and yet he could not identify any
of them at the test identification parade. For this reason
the High Court did not place reliance on his evidence. The
High Court, therefore, found the evidence led by the prose-
cution untrustworthy and acquitted the accused/appellants.
Hence the present appeal.
Mr. Madhav Reddy, the learned counsel for the
appellant-State contended that the presence of PW 1 at the
time of the incident was not only deposed to by PWs 2 and 3
but also by PW 5. The presence of PW 3 at the house at about
4.30 a.m. is deposed to even by the hostile witness PW 4.
He, therefore, submitted that the presence of PWs 1 to 5 is
clearly established and is reinforced by the evidence of PW
13, the medicalman, who examined PW 1 at the Government
Hospital at about 11.45 a.m. on the same day. The Sub-In-
spector PW 24 also deposes that PW 5 had told him that PW 1
had sent him to report the murderous assault on her father.
He submitted that once the presence of PWs 1 and 3 was
established there was no reason to doubt their testimony
merely because PW 3 was honest enough not to falsely involve
any one by pointing an accusing finger at the identification
612
parade. He submitted that even PW 1 was honest enough to
identify only two persons, namely, accused Nos. 3 and 5,
Whom she had an occasion, to see near her cot on the ter-
race. To reject her evidence as regards the identity of
these two accused on the specious plea that their photo-
graphs were shown to her’. before the identification parade
would be, to say the least, unjust. If she could be shown
the photograph why not PW 3 also! He also submitted that it
was preposterous to hold that the injuries found on the left
hand of PW 1 were self-inflicted. The absence of blood on
the bed sheet of the bed on the floor of the terrace clearly
explained that the deceased must have rolled onto the ter-
race floor where the presence of blood was noticed. He,
therefore, submitted that the High Court had reversed the
well reasoned judgment of the. trial court on totally imagi-
nary grounds which had resulted in grave miscarriage of
justice.
Mr. R.K.Garg, learned counsel for the respondents/ac-
cused, submitted that this Court should not interfere with
the decision of the High Court’ unless it’ finds the view
taken by the High Court as perverse and wholly improper,
resulting in miscarriage of justice. In support he cited
State of Jammu & Kashmir v. Hazara Singh & Anr., [1980]
Supp, SCC 641. He also submitted that the investigating
agency had shown extra zealousness as the deceased was a
prominent lawyer and an ex-MLA. Supporting the view of the’
High Court he urged that the presence of PW 1 was highly
doubtful and in any case it would be risky to rely on her
interested testimony regarding the identity of accused Nos.
3 and 5. The ’absence of blood on the bed shows that the
same was planted after the event to concoct the story that
PW 1’ was sleeping on the cot and not downstairs with her
mother PW 2 who’ had recently undergone an operation.’ Once
the evidence of PW 1 is excluded there is no direct
testimony since PW 3 had not identified any of the accused
at the identification parades. In short he supported the
judgment of the High Court and prayed that we should not
interfere in exercise of our extra-ordinary powers under
Article 136 of the Constitution.
The motive for the commission of the crime was the indus-
trial unrest occasioned on account of the strike by the
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 15
workers of the International Packaging ’Company and later by
the transport workers. Indisputably accused No.1 commanded
considerable clout over the employees of various industrial
units such as the International Packaging Company, Andhra
Cotton Mills and the transport industry in Proddatur..
Accused No. 1 was championing the cause of the workmen
during the. prolonged agitation and strike by the workers of
the Inter-
613
national Packaging Company and also spearheaded the agita-
tion by the transport workers. The deceased was the lawyer
for the managements and was considered the main obstacle, in
the realisation of the workers* demands. There was, there-
fore, animosity between the deceased and accused No. 1. This
is more than clear from the oral evidence of PWs 2.3.4, 10.
11.21 to 23 and from the documentary evidence tendered as
Exhs. P-2 to P-5. P-30 to P-37 and P-40 to P-55. In view of
this overwhelming documentary evidence which corroborates
the ocular evidence of the aforesaid prosecution witnesses,
it is established beyond any manner of doubt that the rival-
ry between the trade unions headed by accused No. 1 and the
managements. advised by the deceased had assumed ugly.
proportions. The starting of the INTUC branch at Proddatur
with the active participation of the deceased was perhaps
the last straw on the camel’s back which worsened the rela-
tions between accused No. 1 and the deceased. This is the
motive according tO the prosecution for the crime in ques-
tion. But as has often been commented bitter animosity can
be a double edged Weapon which may be instrumental for
deliberate false involvement or for the witnesses wrongly
inferring and strongly believing (without having actually
witnessed it) that the crime must have been committed by the
rival group. This possibility has to be kept in mind while
evaluating the prosection evidence regarding the involvement
of accused No. 1 and his companions in the commission of the
crime.
There is no dispute regarding the description of the
residential house of the deceased and the location of the
telephone pole to the west thereof. It is not disputed that
the said pole could be conveniently used for slidding down
from the terrace. So also the fact that the telephone con-
nection was snapped is not put in issue. The fact that the
incident occurred on the terrace is not disputed but the
fact that the deceased was sleeping on the floor and PW 1
was sleeping on the cot is disputed. It was suggested in the
course of cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses
that the deceased alone was sleeping on the cot on the
terrace and PW 1 was in fact not in town and even if she was
in town she must have been sleeping with PW 2. Lastly the
fact that the deceased died a homicidal death on receipt of
as many as 33 injuries is not disputed- The find of human
blood on the various articles attached by the police, i.e.
those worn by the deceased as well as PW 1 and those found
lying on the terrace, is clearly established by the reports
Exhs. P-18 and P-19 which have not been questioned. It is in
this background that we must consider if the High Court has
commit. ted any grave error requiring interference under
Article 136 of the Constitution.
614
On the question of presence of PW 1 in Proddatur on the
date of the incident, apart from the oral evidence of PWs 1
to 3 and 5, there is the documentary evidence in the form of
the entry Exh. 56 recorded by PW 24 in the general diary on
April 15, 1975 at about 4.30 a.m. That entry was made on the
information supplied by PW 5. It is clearly stated therein
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 12 of 15
by PW 5 that he had been told by PW 1 that her father was
murdered at his residence. It was on receipt of this infor-
mation that the police went to the house of the deceased,
drew up the inquest report and recorded the statements of
those present there including PW I. The presence of PW 1 is,
therefore, clearly established by this document prepared
within an hour from the time of the incident. This contempo-
raneous document corroborates the oral evidence of the
aforesaid witnesses. She was examined by the medical officer
PW 13 on the same day at about 11.45 a.m. In addition there-
to, the find of the Anatomy book and slippers on the ter-
race, also lends assurance to the prosecution evidence in
this behalf. Therefore, even if it is assumed that the time
of recording her statement’ Exh. P-1 is not correctly re-
corded, her presence at the scene of offence at the material
time is established beyond a shadow of doubt.
Accused No. 1 was a friend Of the deceased till they
fell out. He was a regular visitor to the house of the
deceased and, therefore, PW 1 knew him quite intimately. She
has frankly admitted that others were strangers but she was
able to identify accused Nos. 3 and 5 because she had an
opportunity to see them from close quarters when they were
near her cot. The existence of a cot and a bed on the ter-
race is indicative of the fact that two persons were sleep-
ing on the terrace. There were only three family members
present on the date of the occurrence, one of whom was PW 2
who had undergone surgery only recently and was advised not
to climb the stairs. It is, therefore, obvious that the
deceased and PW-1 slept on the terrace.. The submission that
the bed on the floor was planted is based on the fact that
there was no blood on the bed-sheet of that bed. But this
submission overlooks the existence of blood drops nearabout
the bed. The dead body of the victim was also found lying on
the terrace floor nearby. The High Court relied on the
photograph Exh. D-4 for holding that the bed was fresh and
unused. But as is apparent from the, crossexamination of PW
24 that the said photograph shows "the bed-sheet spread over
the bed on the cot is tucked beneath the bed". Thus the said
photograph is not of the bed on the floor. The High Court
seems to have misread the evidence. Secondly, it is clear
that the dead body was lying at some distance from the bed
suggesting that the deceased had rolled over during the
night or in the course of the attack. The
615
other articles lying nearby e.g towel, shawl, etc. were
blood stained and there Were fresh drops of blood between
the dead body and the western waif leading to the telephone
pole. Since there were Only three family members one of
whom, PW 2, had undergone an operation in the recent past,
it is difficult to understand how PW 1 alone could shift the
dead body of her father from the cot to the place where it
was found to concoct evidence against the accused. It is too
much to attribute such intelligence to PW 1 or for that
matter PW 3 also. If the dead body which was bleeding had in
fact been shifted there would have been blood drops from the
cot to the place where it was found. Besides, where was the
time for the entire exercise? PW 5 was sent to call the
police and he had returned with the police after his report
was entered in the general diary at 4..30 a.m.. It. there-
fore, seems difficult to believe that the bed on the floor
was planted to support the prosecution version that PW 1
slept on the terrace that night..
The medical officer PW 13 found four incised wounds on
the left hand of PW 1, possible by a sharp cutting weapon
like a dagger or knife. These injuries were indeed minor in
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 13 of 15
nature. The High Court has concluded that the possibility of
these injuries being self-inflicted cannot be ruled out, PW
1 says she received these injuries in the process of warding
off the blows aimed at her. PW 13 also deposes that these
injuries could have been received while trying to ward off
the blows on her. Thus the medical evidence supports her
say. However, in crossexamination he stated that all the
four injuries were cut injuries and not stab wounds. In
response to a suggestion made in cross-examination he stated
that the possibility of the injuries being self-inflicted
was not an impossibility. Merely from this suggestion and PW
1 not being a left hander the High Court concluded that the
possibility of the injuries being self-inflicted could not
be ruled out. With respect, the High Court failed to realise
that when an injury is on an accessible part of, the body
which the individual can himself reach, such any injury
could also be self-inflicted and when a medical witness is
asked if it was possible to self-inflict it he would have to
answer in the affirmative unless the direction ’of the
injury or such other factors show otherwise. But merely
because the medical officer says that they could be selfin-
flicted, there is no reason. to jump to such a conclusion
unless’ circumstances establish such a possibility. In the
present case there was hardly any opportunity to self-in-
flict them.. Her not being a left hander should make no
difference because she is bound to. use that hand to ward
off the blows if her assailant is on that side of her bed.
We, therefore, feel that the High Court was not justified in
concluding that PW 1 had self inflicted the wounds found on
her left hand. With
616
respect, this conclusion of the High Court is, to say the
least, wholly conjectural and totally against the weight Of
evidence on record.
The delay in Sending the FIR Exh. P-1 to the Magistrate
has been seriously commented upon by the High Court while
rejecting the explanation given in Exh. P-25. This comment
has lost its significance as the said document has not.been
admitted in evidence by both ’the courts below on the ground
that it is hit by section 162 of the Code. We would have
examined the explanation if that document. had formed part
of the record.’ Any way that cannot impinge On the credibil-
ity of PW 1 if her evidence is otherwise acceptable, which
we find it is’.
On the question of identity it is clear from the evi-
dence of PW 1 that accused No. 1 was known to her quite well
Since before the incident. She could, therefore, have no
difficulty in identifying him even in poor light. Immediate-
ly after the accused fled she ran down and informed her
mother that accused.No. 1 and his companions had killed her
father. Since PW 1 had not disclosed the name of accused No.
1 as one of the assailants to PW 5, the latter did not speak
about him to the police and hence his name does not appear
in the FIR recorded at 4.30 a.m. Accused No. 1 pleaded an
alibi: which he miserably failed to probabilise. The absence
of names of assailants in the general diary entry made on
-the basis Of information supplied by PW 5 at the behest of
PW 1 has weighed considerably in the High Court doubting the
version regarding the involvement of accused No. 1 in the
commission of the crime. It must, however, be realised that
PW 1 had disclosed the name of accused No. 1 at the earliest
point of time when the complaint Exh. P-I and the inquest
report Exh. P-6 were recorded. It must also be realised
that,PW 1 was under terrible strain at that time. Not only
had this young girl lost her father in a ghastly assault,
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 14 of 15
she had also to look after her ailing mother: and console
her. She frantically tried to inform the police on telephone
but found the instrument dead with the wires snapped. She,.
therefore, asked this young boy aged ’about 16 years, PW 5,
to go to the police station and fetch the police. There was
hardly-any time to give details of the incident. Under the
circUmstances the absence of the name of accused ’No. 1 as
One of the assailants in the entry made in the general diary
at the instance of PW 5 is quite understandable. Once it is
accepted that PW 1 had slept on the terrace and had sus-
tained the injuries in the incident, her evidence regarding
the identity of accused No. 1 who was quite well known to
her cannot be doubted.’We are, therefore, of the view that
the High Court was not justified in disturbing the view
taken by the trial court in this behalf.
617
That takes us to the question of the involvement of
accused Nos. 3 and 5. The evidence of PW 1 is that when she
heard the cries of her father she woke up and saw accused
No. 1 and six or seven others belabouring him. This means
that she did not know and could not identify the companions
of accused No. 1. However, when she tried to raise an alarm
three of the assailants approched her and pinned her down to
the bed, and one of them threatended to stab her. He did
carry out his threat as is evident from the injuries sus-
tained by her. She Was able to identify two of them ’at the
identification parade held on May 23, 1975. This is proved
through the ’evidence of PW 14 who conducted the test iden-
tification parades- Now accused Nos. 3 and 5 had surrendered
before the court on May 13, 1975. PW 14 received the requi-
sition for arranging a test identification parade on May 17,
1975. The identification parade was actually held on May 23,
1975. There’ is no valid explanation tendered by the prose-
cution for the delay in holding the. identification parades.
The defence has suggested in the cross-examination of PW 1
and PW 25 that in the meantime the accused who were in
custody were shown to the witnesses and the police had
secured a group photograph in which accused Nos. 3 and 5
figured to facilitate their identification. The High Court
was, however, reluctant to place absolute reliance On the
evidence of PW 1 regarding the identity of accused Nos. 3
and 5. In the absence of a ,valid explanation for the delay
we do not think that this approach of the High Court can be
said to be manifestly wrong to call for our intervention.
’
In the result this appeal is partly allowed insofar as
it relates to original accused No. 1 i.e., respondent No. 1
before us. The High Court’s order acquitting him is set
aside. The appeal is,’ however, dismissed so far as original
accused Nos. 3 and 5 i.e., respondent Nos. 2 and 3 before us
are concerned- We restore the order of conviction and sen-
tence of original accused NO. 1--respondent No. 1--recorded
by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Cuddapah for his
involvement in the crime with several other unknown persons.
We, however, give the benefit of doubt to original accused
Nos. 3 and 5, i.e, respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and confirm the
order of their acquittal recorded by tire High Court. The
original accused No. 1--respondent No. 1 will submit to his
bail forthwith- The bail bonds in respect of other two
respondents will stand cancelled.
Y.L. Appeal partly
allowed
618
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 15 of 15