Case: Shaik Bade Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh

2) The facts giving rise to this appeal in aare as under:Around 7.00 p.m. on 20th December, 1995, when Madamsetti Venkateswara Rao @ Konda (deceased) alongwith Pinapatiand J. Raviwas playing carom, accused6, armed with knives, got into the 2nd floor of a house belonging to Valientered the room where the deceased, PW 1 and PW 19 were playing carom.stood near the door.stabbed the deceased indiscriminately and when the deceased fell down,caught hold of the deceased whereascut the head of the deceased. Thencarried the head of the deceased out of the room andwent on a scooter to the house of Maddamsetti Siva Kumarand threw the head in front of his house.3) We are concerned with Shaik Badein this appeal.could not be traced as he was absconding and, therefore, against rest of the accused the trial was conducted.4) So far asis concerned, on the basis of evidence led before the trial court, it was found that he hadstabbed the deceased indiscriminately and when the deceased fell down,he had caught hold of the deceased along withand while they were holding the deceased,cut the head of the deceased so as to separate the same from his body. Thereafterwent on a scooter with the head of the deceased to the house ofand threw the head near his house. The trial court had examined 23 witnesses, which also included eye witnesses.5) At the end of the trial, after examining witnesses and considering the evidence adduced before the trial court,were found guilty of offences under Sections 302 and 449 of the IPC whereaswere found to be guilty of offence u/s 506(2) of the IPC.was sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2000/in default of payment of fine to suffer six months simple imprisonment for offence u/s 302 of the IPC and similar punishment was inflicted for commission of offence u/s 449 of the IPC. For committing offence u/s 506(2) of the IPC, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and a fine of Rs.500/in default of payment of fine to suffer one months simple imprisonment. All the sentences were to run concurrently.6) Being aggrieved by the judgment and order of the trial court,filed an appeal before the High Court and the High Court was pleased to acquitwhereas the appeal filed bywere dismissed. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order confirming the conviction,has filed this appeal.

Reasoning: 12) So far as the first submission with regard to giving different treatment tois concerned, in our opinion, the submission made by the learned counsel appearing foris not correct. Allegation againstis that upon entering the premises of3, they indiscriminately stabbed the deceased while the deceased was sitting and playing carom. When the deceased fell down,held hands of the deceased and at that timeremoved the head of the deceased. Thus,4, along withstabbed the deceased. Thereafter, they caught hold of the deceased andremoved the head of the deceased. At the instance ofhis knife has been recovered. According to the evidence, the knife which was alleged to have been used bydid not have any blood stain on it. Version of the eye witnesses was to the effect thathad also stabbed the deceased. In view of the fact that there was no blood on the knife which was alleged to have been used bythe High Court gave benefit of doubt to4 has been acquitted by the High Court.13) So far asis concerned, there is evidence of eye witnesses to the effect that after entering the premises ofalong with others, he stabbed the deceased. The knifewhich has been recovered at the instance ofhas blood stains on it. Moreover,14 andhave in unequivocal terms deposed having seenwith a knife. Eye witnesses have clearly identifiedwhen he was stabbing the deceased. For the aforestated reasons, in our opinion, case ofcannot be compared with that ofIn any case, there is ample evidence againstwhich reveals that he was one of the persons who actively participated in the offence and, therefore, in our opinion the High Court did not commit any error while confirming conviction ofWe have gone through the evidence ofwho is one of the eye witnesses. He has stated thathad entered the premises ofad started stabbing the deceased. Similarlyanother eye witness has also adduced evidence to the effect thathad stabbed the deceased and when the deceased fell down he caught hold of hand of the deceased so as to enableto cut the head of the deceased. There is also evidence to the effect that after committing murder,had left the premises on a scooter driven byand his going on the scooter had witnessed by