HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2567 of 2004 Between: 1. Udatha Sivaiah 2. Udatha Ravi .. Appellants/A.2 and A.9 And The State of A.P., rep., by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. ..Respondent This Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2567 of 2004 JUDGMENT:- After elaborate trial conducted by the lower Court in which eight accused persons were tried and in which nineteen witnesses were examined apart from marking several other documents on thirteen charges and three additional charges including the one under Section 302 I.P.C., the lower Court ultimately acquitted the accused for major offences, but convicted A.2 and A.9 of the offences under Section 324 I.P.C and sentenced them to rigorous imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs.200/- each. Questioning the same, A.2 and A.9 filed this appeal. Having regard to limited scope of scrutiny in this appeal with regard to overt acts attributed to A.2 and A.9, I do not propose to indulge in detailed scrutiny of the entire prosecution case and evidence in this appeal. Suffice it to note that charge Nos.7 and 11 are the relevant charges against A.2 and A.9 for the purpose of this appeal. It is alleged that on 14.05.1996 at about 01.00 p.m., in Kommalapudi Village of Manubolu Mandal, A.2 beat P.W.3 with iron rod on his back and that A.6 and A.9 beat P.W.4 with iron rod and stick respectively and caused injuries to him. A.6 was no more by the date of trial in the lower Court and the case against A.6 stood abated. 2. It is specific evidence of P.W.3 that A.2 beat him with iron rod on his back side resulting in bleeding injury. He identified M.O.3 as the iron rod with which A.2 beat him on his back side. There is absolutely no cross- examination of P.W.3 on this aspect of A.2 beating him with M.O.3-iron rod on his back. This evidence of P.W.3 is corroborated by the medical evidence of P.W.10 and Ex.P.8-wound certificate. The medical evidence show that P.W.3 was having an oblique lacerated injury on the right infra scapular area 4”x1”x ½”, which injury is a simple one. 3. It is evidence of P.W.4 that A.9 beat him with stick on right shoulder and on mouth resulting in bleeding injuries and that A.6 beat him with iron rod on neck and back resulting in bleeding injury. He identified M.O.4 as the iron rod of A.6 and M.O.5 as stick of A.9 with which A.6 and A.9 beat him. Again, there is no cross- examination of P.W.4 on this aspect. But there is no medical corroboration for evidence of P.W.4 with regard to overt acts attributed to A.9. Ex.P.10-wound certificate issued by P.W.10 shows no injury on mouth of P.W.4 or right shoulder of P.W.4. As per Ex.P.10, injuries found on P.W.4 are pain and tenderness on cervical spine, sacral spine and contusion on left infra scapular area. Those injuries are found to be simple in nature. In the absence of any injuries on right shoulder or on mouth of P.W.4 as per findings of the medical officer, oral evidence of P.W.4 may not be entitled for any weight. In that view of the matter, the lower Court should not have found A.9 guilty under Section 324 I.P.C for beating P.W.4 with stick. 4. In the result, the Criminal Appeal is partly allowed setting aside the conviction and the sentence passed by the lower Court against the second appellant/A.9 and acquitting him; and the Criminal Appeal is partly dismissed confirming conviction of the first appellant/A.2 under Section 324 I.P.C., but altering sentence of imprisonment from six months to the period already undergone by him during investigation and trial. Fine amount of A.2 is maintained. _________________________________________ JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU Dt.20.09.2011 Vjl