IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 1057 0F 2009 criminal Appeal under section 378 (3) & (1) of cr.p.c. against the order dated 17 -08-2007 in S.c. No. 341 of 2006 on the file of the court of the Assistant sessions Judge, Adilabad. Between: The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by the Public prosecutor, High Court of A.p, Hyderabad ...APELLANT/ Petitioner AND 1. lVlorra Sudarshan, S/o Bhumanna, 36 years, Occ: [\/uneem, R/o. Shantinagar, Adilabad. 2. Nadimetla Ganesh Sio Rajalingu,3T years, Occ: STD Booth, R/o Shantinagar, Adilabad 3. Sairi Lasmanna, S/o Santena,20 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o yapalguda, Adilabad 4. I\,4ora Ashok, S/o Bhumanna,20 years, Occ: Auto Driver, R/o Yapalguda, Adilabad 5. It4orra Santosh, S/o Markandeya, 20 years, Occ: Coolie F/o Shantinagar, Adilabad. ...RESPODENTS/ Accused Counsel for the Appellant: THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Counsel for the Respondents: SRI H. VENUGOPAL The Court made the following: ORDER HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI CRIMI NAL APPEAL NO.10570F 2009 JUDGMENT: of the prosecution Section 3 13 Cr.P.C. This appeal is preferred by the State against the judgment of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge at Adilabad' for enhancement of the sentence awardeci in S C'No'34 1 of 2006 dated 17.O8.2O07, whereby, the respondents/ A- 1' convicted for the offence punishable under IndianPenalCode(IPC)andsentencedtopayafineofRs'1,000/. each, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for trvo months' The resPondents/A-I to A-5 were punishable under Section 307 IPC' The case of the prosecution' in brief is that on 08'01'2006 at 9.15 pm the complainant lodged a compiaint stating that at about 7.OO pm the respondents/A- 1 to A-5 went to the house of the complainant with an intention to kiIl the family members of the complainant, beat the complainant and his sons with sticks and iron rods on their heads and caused bleeding injuries due to previous enmitY. On aPPearance of the accused, charge under Section 307 lPC came to be framed, read over and explained to the accused' to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried' The prosecution, in order to prove its case' examined P Ws l to 10 and got marked Exs Pl to P9 and MOs I and 2' After closure evidence, the accused were examined under No oral or documentary evidence was adduced A-2 and A-4 were Section 324 of the acquitted lbr the offence 1 on behalf of the accused i t i 2 The trial Court, on appraisal of entire evidence both oral and documentary, held that the prosecution has proved the offence under Section 324 IPC against A-1, A-2 and A-4 and accordingly convicted and sentenced them as stated supr. Aggrieved by the same, the State preferred this appeal for enhancement of sentence. Heard and perused the record. The State has not fi1ed any appeal against the acquittal of the respondents/A- i to A-5 for the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC. This appeal relates to the offence committed by the respondents / A- 1 , A-2 and A-4 under Section 324 IPC, whereby the State seeks enhancement of punishment. From the evidence ol P.Ws. 1 to 1O, it is clearly established that the incident occurred at the housc of P.W. 1 and P.W.1 sustained injury in the hands of A- 1, P.W.2 sustained injury by A-2 and A-4. The ingredients of Section 307 IPC are not established since the \\,eapon used is stick, as admitted by the witnesses. Therefore, in this view of the matter, the trial Court was right in imposing fine against A-1, A-2 and A-4. Hence, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed confirming the judgment dated 17.08.2007 passed in S.C.No.341 of 2006 on the fiie of the Assistant Sessions Judge at Adilabad. Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand dismissed ,TRUE COPY// SD/-M.RAMANA KRISHNA DEPUTY REGISTRAR tu SECTION OFFICER To, 1 2 3 4 5 6 s The Assistant Sessions Judge at Adilabad. The Judicial l\,4agistrate of First Class, Adilabad. The Station House Officer, Adilabad lTown Police Station, Adilabad. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. (OUT) One CC to H, Venugopal, Advocate IOPUC] Two CD Copies br I \ k-i/ HIGH COURT DATED:2510212021 JUDGMENT CRLA.No.1057 of 2009 DISMISSING THE CRL.APPEAL. 7 * { o rA ;, t r tl A a Joo )n).1 "l ,/ 22 t,lAR 2021 ?) s