Criminal Appeal No 12 of 1978 From the Judgment and Order dated 1941976 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Referred Trial No 2 of 1976
K Ram Kumar for the Appellant
G Narasimhulu and SK Mehta for the Respondents
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BC RAY J
This appeal by special leave is against the judgment and order dated 1941976 made by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the Referred Trial No 2 of 1976 and Criminal Appeal Nos 159 168 and 169 of 1976 acquitting all the 7 accused who were convicted and sentenced by the Ses sions Court West Godawari Division at Eluru Andhra Pradesh in Sessions Case No 71 of 1975
The prosecution case in short is that on 23rd July 1974 at 730 am the accused persons forming themselves into an unlawful assembly in the house of the 1st accused and arming themselves with spears sticks and crow bars attacked the deceased while he was returning from the canal carrying water in what is locally known as Kavadi
When the de ceased reached the house of the 1st accused all the ten accused came from behind and the 2nd accused gave a blow with a stick on the back of the head of the deceased as a consequence of which he fell down on his back
Then the 1st accused speared the deceased on his face and legs the 5th accused poked the deceased on his right wrist with a crow bar and the 6th accused speared the deceased on his legs and hands
The 329 rest of the accused then beated the deceased with sticks indiscriminately
The deceased cried Bobu
This was heard by his wife PW5 from her house which is situated about 150 yards
She immediately ran to the scene of occurence and saw accused 1 to 8 and two others entering into the house of the 1st accused
PW 5 then sent intimation to her brother PW 2 who was working as labourer in a sugar factory through PW 8
PW 2 and others took the deceased to Bhimadole Police Station in a cart which is about 4 kms
away from their house and lodged the FIR exhibit P 1 wherein all the names of accused Nos A1 to A4 and A6 to A8 as well as the nature of injuries inflicted on the person of the deceased were mentioned
This FIR was registered at 930 am and a case us 326 IPC was registered
Subsequently the deceased was found dead on examination by the Doctor PW 12 at the Government Hospital Elurn
The FIR was then altered to one us 302 IPC
The Inspector of Police made inquest of the dead body and the inquest report has been marked as exhibit P5
All the 10 accused were charged us 147 IPC The accused Al A4 A5 and A6 who were armed with deadly weapons were also charged us 148 IPC and accused A1 to A10 were charged us 302 read with section 149 IPC They were all committed to the Court of Sessions
The Sessions Judge after considering the entire evidence and also heating the counsel for the prosecution as well as the defence found that accused A 1 to A3 and A5 to A8 were guilty of the offence us 147 IPC and also us 302 read with section 149 IPC A1 A5 and A6 were also held guilty us 148 IPC
The accused A4 A9 and A10 were however acquitted of the offence us 147 IPC Accused A4 was also not found guilty of offence us 148 IPC The accused A 1 A5 and A6 who were convicted us 302 read with section 149 IPC were sentenced to death and they were directed to he hanged by their necks till their death subject to confirma tion by the High Court
A3 A7 and A8 were convicted us 302 read with section 149 IPC and they were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life
A2 was also convicted us 302 read with section 149 IPC and he was sentenced to death and directed to be hanged by his neck till deathsubject to confirmation by the High Court
The accused A1 to A3 and A5 to A8 who were convicted us 147 IPC were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year
A1 A5 and A6 were convicted us 148 IPC and they were sen tenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years
All the above sentences were to run concurrently
Against this judgment and order 3 criminal appeals being Criminal Appeal Nos
1591976 1681976 and 1691976 were filed
These criminal appeals along with RT No 2 of 1976 were heard by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad and the learned Judge by his order dated 5th May 1976 acquitted all the accused of both the charges of rioting and murder levelled 330 against them and set aside the convictions and sentences allowing all the appeals and rejecting the reference
It is against this judgment and order the instant appeal on special leave was filed before this court by the State
This court granted special leave to appeal by its order dated 1111978 and also ordered issue of bailable warrants against each of the accused persons in the sum of Rs10000 with one surety to the satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge Eluru
We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and we are constrained to hold that the judgment passed by the High Court acquitting all the accused is not a proper judgment in accordance with the provisions of Section 354 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973
The learned Judge has not at all considered and marshalled the evidences examined on behalf of the prosecution particularly the evidences of PWs 1 3 4 6 and 7 who were eye witnesses to the gruesome murder committed in the morning at about 730 am
The names of all the 7 accused appeared in the FIR lodged by PW 2 in the Police Station at 930 am exhibit PI and exhibit P23 and P24 dated 2371974
The learned Judge did not formulate properly the points for decision and did not marshal the evidences on record and did not come to specific finding on each of the points for determination by recording specific reasons for arriving at the decision
It is really unfortu nate that the learned Judge approached the case from wrong angle and without properly formulating the points for deci sion and without any proper appraisal of the evidences adduced by the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused persons and also without adverting to the reasonings of the Sessions Judge has perfunctorily come to the finding that the prosecution has failed to prove beyond doubt the case against the accused even though there are eye witnesses PWs 1 3 4 6 and 7 to the occurence
In our considered opinion this judgment is not in accordance with the mandatory requirements as laid down in Section 354 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
We therefore set aside the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh and remit the ease back to the High Court Andhra Pradesh for deciding the case in accord ance with law on a proper appraisal and marshalling of the evidences on record as early as possible
The order of interim stay is vacated and bail bonds are cancelled
The records be sent to the High Court forthwith
The High Court will be free to consider whether the accused will be en larged on bail


Summary:
The ten accused persons forming themselves into an unlawful assembly in the house of A 1 and arming themselves with spears sticks and crow bars attacked the deceased while he was returning from the canal carrying water in Kavadi 
As a result of the injuries sustained by the deceased he died
All the ten accused were charged under section 147 IPC accused A 1 A4 A5 and A 6 who were armed with deadly weapons were also charged under section 148 IPC and accused A 1 to A I0 were further charged under section 302 read with section 149 IPC
The trial Court acquitted A 4 A 9 and A I0 of all the charges levelled against them
Accused A 1 to A 3 and A 5 to A 8 were convicted section 147 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year
Accused A I A 5 and A 6 were convicted section 148 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years
Accused A 1 A 2 A 5 and A 6 were convicted us 302 read with section 149 IPC and sentenced to death
Accused A 3 A 7 and A 8 were also convicted section 302 read with section 149 IPC but sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life
The High Court allowed the appeals flied by the convict ed accused and acquitted all of them of the charges levelled against them and rejected the reference
Allowing the appeal of the State to this Court HELD 1
The judgment passed by the High Court acquit ting all the accused is not a proper judgment in accordance with the provisions of section 354 of the Code of Criminal Proce dure 1973
The learned Judge has not at all considered and marshalled the evidence of witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution particularly the evidence of PWs
1 3 4 6 and 7 who were eye witnesses to the gruesome murder commit ted in the morning at about 730 am 328 The names of all the seven accused appeared in the FIR 330 C 2
The learned Judge approached the case from wrong angle and without properly formulating the points for deci sions and without any proper appraisal of the evidences adduced by the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused persons and also without adverting to the reasoning of the Sessions Judge has perfunctorily come to the finding that the prosecution has failed to prove beyond doubt the case against the accused even though there are eye witnesses PWs 1 3 4 6 and 7 to the occurrence
330 E 3
The judgment of the High Court is set aside and the case is remitted back to the High Court for deciding it in accordance with law on a proper appraisal and marshalling of the evidence on record as early as possible
330 F G