Syed Shabir Ahmed v. Bhoomaiah Pw

The State of Telanganz, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad. ...RESPODENT/CC,MPLAINANT ...APPELLANT/AC CUSED NO.4 AND Counsel for the Appellants : M/S AHAMED GHORI FIAZE Counsel for the Respondent: SMT SHALINI SAXENA ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR CRL.A.NO: 174OF 2018 Bail Slip;- The Petitioners/As, A7 and A20 a_re d^irected to be released o4 bail b_y OrJni'.ii gtn iigtr Court Dated in l.A.No.l of 2023 in Crl.A.No.174 of 2018 dated 25.72023. ihe Petitioner/(A22) is directed to be released on bail b1.Ord-er 9f High Court in l.A.No.1/202i dated 25.08.2021 and surrendered on 7.12.2021 as pet Order made in 1.A.22021. Criminal Appeal U/s 374 (2) of Cr.P.C against the Judgment made in s.c.No.4s,of 2014 dated 25.09.2017 on the fite of the special sessions Judge for Trial of cases under the SCs & STs (POA) Act cum-vlll Additional sessions Judge at Nizamabad. Dharpally Mandal (A5) Nallavellv Villaqae of Dharpallv Mandal (A'l ) Nallavelly Villagae of Dharpally Mandal (A2) Between: --1.-Vooa" Bhaskar @ shivarathri Bhaskar s/o Vodde pedda Gangaram R/o. z Voooe-Haruhi 6 sfrivalathii Ramulu, S7o Vodde Pedda Gangaram R/o' a. SGri"gi 'c"pii 6 tr/|anoula Gopal Sio Lingaiah R/o. Nallavelly Village of +. CottJ Vtittraiitr @ n'aaarapu tt/luthaiah S/o Buchi Mallaiah, R/o. Nallavelly s Mii[ala chinnd Vtlnkati @ bdde chinna Venkati, s/o Makkala Venkanna, 6 f"enugu Yabagiri S/o tvlahikyam, R/o. Nallavelly Villagae of O Z. frrfi1fl,1j'Lixmip'Vaa6e Laxmi Wo Makkala Chinna Venkafi, R/o. Nallavelly ...AppELLANTS/AccusED Dharpally Mandal (A20) viilagae of Dharpally Mandat (A-22) R/o. Nallavelly Village of Dharpally Mandal (A15) 'eanOiVaa"giri Villagae of DharPallY Mandal (A7) State of retangana, Rep , by its Public Prosecutor,.Hish SSlfrt.H,t%r^33to,"o*, AND Counsel for the Appellants : SRI R.PRASANTH Counsel for the Respondent : SMT SHALINI SAXENA ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: COMMON JUDGMENT .{: :1' ',.. 8 THE HOIIOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDT}R AND THE HOIN,BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAI, CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos. 1 188,1L94 and 1359 of2OL7 arrd. 174 of 2O18 COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per Hon'ble Sri lustice K.Surender) The CrirrLinal Appeal No.1188 of 2O7T is fiied by the appellants 7 ac:used Nos.8 and 9, Criminal Appeal No.1194 of 2Ol7 is filed by the appellants/accused Nos.16, 35 :md 36, , Criminal .Appeal No. 1359 of 2Ol7 is filed ,ry the appellants / acr: rsed No.4, and the Criminal Appeal Nr,. 174 of 2018 is filerl by the appellants/accused Nos.1, 2, S, Z lS,20 and 22, aggr r:ved by the judgment dated 25.09.2.OlZ in S.C.No.4S of 1,,()14 on the file of the Special Sessions Judge for Trial c,f car;r:s under the SCs ald STs (poA) Act-cum-VIII Additiona Sies sions Judge, Nizamabad. 2 . Sin,:e :Lll the appeals are filed questionrng the judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge in S.O.No.45 of 2074, all th,: appeals are being disposed off by way of this common jr: clgnr:nt. I 13*'-. 9

3. PW. 1 is de facto complainant, who was working as Forest Beat Officer, Gouraram Village, Indulwai Range. He went to the police station at 4.3O A.M., and lodged a Telugu written complaint. In the complaint, PW. I narrated that the villagers of Gouraram Village protested before the Forest Range Office, threatening the officials of forest department. The villagers were agitating for allotment of surplus lands to them for the purpose of cultivation. On 14.09.2013, at around 1O.OO P.M., while he along with the Forest Range $r' Offrcer/GAngaiah (hereinafter referred to as the deceasedJ, and other oflicials who are PW.2, PW.3, PW.6, PW.7 and PW.8, along with other forest oflice personnel proceeded to the Forest Range Officers' Jeep to Gouraram Reserve Forest area, around 11.45 P.M. When they reached the Reserve Forest area, they noticed that 27 villagers who are named in the FIR and others encroached the Forest Area Land and were cultivating with tractors. On seeing the forest officials, the named accused and other persons have signaled among themselves and all of them attacked the forest officials. The accused were holding sticks. The deceased/Gangaiah, was also present and women folk sprinkled chili powder 1n 10 /t deceased's ev:s and the male persons attacked the deceased with an zrxe e nd dragged him out of the jeep. As a lesult of the attack. or.r his head with an axe, the deceased/ G angaiah died on t.he s,pot. Other office personnel were also injured They were ,als.r treated by Doctor for injuries 4 . On re'ce:r'ing the complaint, PW .24, the Circle h Lspector of Police, trichl)ally, went to the scene of offence, dre,v rough sketch zrnd ,:onducted scene of offence panchanama. Material rtlec:ts, which are one pair of chappal, sticl<s, etc., were seized. Inquest proceedings were concluded at the scene antl the dead body of the deceased was sent f,rr post- mortem r:xarr: ination. The post-mortem was condu:ted by PW. 16, wh o i,;sued post-mortem report opining that the death of tLLe rleceased was on account of grievous injuries. Death was due to polytrauma with head injury due to intra cranial ht:morrhage. PW. 16 further opined that injuries were possible rvith r;Jearp weapon.

5. The investigation was handed over to PW.25 by PW.24. During in','estrg;ation , on 2l-O9.2013, seizure of the reaterial objects wa.s; elfected at the instance of accused Nos.1 to 4, I .1n-* 1l 15, 19, 25 to 28, and the confessional statements of the accused were recorded. On 23.09.2013, accused Nos.S, 7, 14, 16, 20, 22 to 25, and 37 were arrested. Witnesses examined for prosecution are as under: $,:' PWs Pw1 Name of the witness Mohammed Maqbool Pw-2 Pw-3 Pw-4 Pw-5 Pw-6 Syed Moinuddin Chatapuram Mohari Rodda Hemalatha Rodda G Kamashetty Yadagiri Pw-7 Pw-8 Syed Shabir Ahmed V. Bhoomaiah Pw-9 Pw- 1O Shaiba Vaikuntam Thalari Sailu Brief stateme!.t of witness He is Fore st Beat Oflicer of Indulwai Range a report to the police on who gave 15.09.2017stating that Forest Ralge Officer Rodda Gangararn was killed. He has named 27 accused in the FIR. He does not say he has any preuious acquaintance or familiarity with the Accused prior to the incident and PW- 1 also has not given descriptive particulars of the Accused. He admitted in his cross examination that FIR was lodged the next morning at 6AM. There is an unexplained delay of 6 Hrs in lodging the FIR. He is the Jeep Driver. He stated that he cannot say the nature ald shape of MO,s Axe He accompalied PWl, PW2 and deceased. He admitted that he calnot give dimensions of MO's. She is the wife of the deceased o2 and Sickle o3 He is the brother of the deceased. e accompanied other PWs and deceased. H He admitted in his cross examination he did not know A1 and ,\2 on the day Dharna conducted revl0us He accompanied other PWs and deceased. He accompanied other PWs and deceased. He admitted in his cross examination that Chilli Powder fell in his eyes and eyes of other PWs. He is a Private Photographer He is workin as VRO of Kesharam V e I l I I i 1', t2 Pw-11 ). Balaram Pw- 12 l3angr Balaiah Pw- 13 llathu Ll Praven Kumar -) Pw- 14 Meichll-rri Siiyar.rr': a Pw-15 Komrre. Ashok Rv-16 I)r Balraj Pw- 17 I.,. 'y'eena Pw- 18 \'. Sucershan Pw-19 S. I{aje :shwar Pw-20 Dr. P. Shirish Kurnar Pw-21 A. Danrodaram and panch witness for Scene of Offence Palchalama and Inquest Pancha eama. He categorically deposed in b:s chief examination that Chilli Porv,ler was sprinkled on the Jeep and the rvind screen of Jee was cracked. He is working as VRO of Bhumpaly Village artd panch witness for confesr;ion and seizure panchanama of A1, A2, A4, A15, A2O, A22 artd A35. Hc ca:egorically admitted in his Cross Examina tion that descnptions of Material Objects MO's 2, 17 , 18 & 19 are not given in the recovery anchanama He worked as \aRO of Doosgoan Vtllage and panchwitness for confession and r;eizure of A5. He worked as VRO of Induhvai V lage ald panchwitness for confession and :;eizure of A7 and A8. He worked as VRO of Mittapally Vrllage and panch witness for confession ald r;eizure of A9 and A12. He worked as VRA of Ramadugu Village and panch witness for confession and :;eizure of 416. He is the Doctor working in Go rernment Hospital who conducted Po,itmortem Exarnination over the dead bod.r of the deceased on 15.09.20I3. He iss.red PME Report stating that the exact causrr of death is Poly Trauma with head injury dr:: to Intra Cranial Hemorrhage. It is elicited tiom him that the injuries sustained b the deceased. aIe ossible in Road Accident She worked as Tahsildar of I )harpally Mandal and issued caste certil;cates of accused. He worked asa Tahsildar of KrLmareddy Mandal and issued caste certificate o i PWl. She worked as Dy.Tahsildar of Bodhan Mandal and issued caste certilicate of deceased. He is the doctor who issued injury r.ertihcate of PWs 1, 2, 3 and 8. He deposed that the ln unes are s1m le in nature He worked as S.I of Police P. S Dharpally and alch witness for confession and .. eizure of I 13 Pw-22 J. Naresh Pw-23 D. Ravi Pw-24 P. Srisailam Pw-25 S. Anil Kumar A16 He worked as S.l of Police P.S Dichpally and panch witness for confession and seizure of A22. He worked as S.I of Police P.S Jakranpally ald panch witness for confession ald seizure of 49. He is the C.I of Police P.S. Dichpally who investig ated the case rnitially He is the DSP who investigated most of the CASC. He is the Inspector of Police who verified investigation done by PW-24 and filed charge sheet. He has said that when there is cross focus of headlights of two vehicles a person may not be able to see the inmates of the vehicles clearly. It is elicited from him that PWs 1 to 3 did not state before him regarding specific overt acts of A1 and A2. He further stated that no Test Identihcation Parade was conducted in this case. He admitted that no proof was hled before the court to show that the said land being cultivated belo s toForest De artment.

6. Though 27 persons were identified as accused at the time of registering FIR, charge-sheet was laid against 37 persons. The accused Nos.28 to 37 were a-lso arrested during the course of investigation.

7. The learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellants mainly on the ground that the eye-witnesses have identifred accused Nos.1 ald 2, as the persons, who assaulted the deceased with an axe and a stick. In so far as the other accused/appellants are concerned, learned Sessions Judge .,J 'i]' 14 observed tha - the recoveries were made from them by the Investigari.ng ,ltfhcer during the course of investigatiot I

8. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant,; would submit thzLt, zrdmittedly there was a mob attack hut it is highly impros sible that the witnesses have identllied the villagers, w'ho were named in the FIR. Though the names of the accused v,r:re mentioned in the FIR, but it is not clear as to how thr: narnes of the accused was known to pW. t, when the incident to:k place at midnight and there is no evidence of light.

9. Lea:'ned <:ounsel further argued that there was no test identifical ic,n parade conducted by the Investigating Officer to identifS' zrnl of the accused. The evidence of the witnesses was recorded Sefore the tria_l Court nearly after two and half years fronr the date of incident arrd it is highly impossible for the witnesses to identify the accused. Learned ,;ounsel further submi.,s; that since the alleged incident happr:ned in the midnight and the scene of offence is a Reserve Forest area, there is .:ro scope for any light, at the time of ir:cident. tI\ 15 Therefore, the identilication of the accused by the witnesses before the trial Court cannot be believed.

10. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that there are specilic overt-acts which were attributed to accused Nos.l and 2. T}re villagers also attacked the ofhcers other than the deceased. They also received injuries. PW. 16-Doctor, who conducted post- mortem, found that the injuries on the head of the deceased were fatal and the said injuries could be caused by sharp weapon. The villagers were acquainted with the forest officials since they were conducting dharna over a period of time, before the incident of murder. For the said reason, the Investigating Ofhcer did not deem it necessary to conduct test identification parade. The complaint was Iiled by PW. 1. At the earliest point of time, in the complaint, PW. 1 narrated that the women folk have sprinkled chilli powder and men assaulted them. 1 1 . In the complaint, it was not specilically stated as to who attacked the deceased and the villagers, and who attacked PW. 1 and other officials. However, while deposing t6 before ttre Corrrt below, PWs.1, 2, 3, 6, 7 and 8 have stated that accuseci No.l beat the deceased with an axr: on his head. Furt-her, accused No.2 beat the deceased with a stick on his right .-high. The villagers and other accused beat the Forest Ollice personnel and also damaged their vehicles.

72. Thr: lea.r ned counsel for the appellants argr Led that slnce no spe c:ific overt-acts of the appellants herr:in were attributed in the complaint, the said overt-acts attriL,uted for the Iirst timr: before the Court below, ought to hi.rve been rejected. 1 3. Though the argument appears to be attractive, however, tlre ,7e facto complainant, PW. I and several other officers rn'ere attacked and injured by the villagt,rs. The complaint was hled giving the names of the village rs, who attacked thern. It was mentioned in the complaint :hat the men have a1 tacked the deceased. Admittedly, PV/. 1 and others wr:re in the state of shock on account of the i ncident, when se'zeral villagers attacked them with axes. I ! is the specific case of PW. 1 and others that all the village rs were ;..\-- I7 {:' visiting Forest Range Office and were conducting dharna, demanding for allocation of surplus land in the forest.

14. Not a single suggestion is put to the witnesses during cross-examination nor any answer was adduced for this Court to consider that the named accused were strangers to the witnesses. In the present scenario, when the villagers went to the Forest Office and conducted dharna, it cannot be said that the forest officials could not identify the villagers. The specific overt-acts attributed to accused Nos.l and 2 before the Court below cannot be disregarded only on the ground that such oveit-acts were not attributed in the complaint.

15. As already discussed, PW. 1 ald others were in the state of shock apparently on account of the said incident. The incident happened on 15.09.20 13 aI 12.45 A.M., and within 3 hours, written complaint was hled. In the present circumstalces, the specific overt-acts attributed to accused Nos.1 and 2, during the course of trial, cannot be brushed aside. i 18

16. Mos1. ol the witnesses i.e., PWs.1, 2. 3, 6 to 8 specificall,z stated that accused Nos.l and 2 attar:ked the deceasect, Tli: attack by accused No.l was with an axe on the hea<l of the deceased and accused No.2 with a stick. Accordin6J to Doctor/PW. 16, the death of the dece:.sed was on accot-urt of the injuries on the head with a sharp weapon. Admitteclly', tLLe fatal injury was on account of the axe and not by ttLe in-uries received with stick. Doctor/PW. 1(i did not state specifically as to which of the injuries tvere on account of the sharp !\.eapon and which injuries were due tt: beating with a s ti<:k. However, the fact remains that accus ed No.2 attacked the cleceased with a stick and the fatal injuries on the head of tLLr: deceased was with an axe.

17. Learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellants on the basis, of specific overt-acts attributed to accused Nos.1 and 2 and also on the basis of the recoveries effected from the othe r accused. The recoveries made from the other accused were sent to the FSL. Though FSL report indicates that blood wa,s found, it does not specify as to whom the blood group belongs to. :\ t9

18. The argument of the learned counsel for the appellants that the test identification proceedings were not conducted, as such, the identification of the accused is doubtful, cannot be accepted in the present facts of the case.

19. Under Section 149 of I.P.C., though no specific overt- acts are attributed to some of the accused, however, Section 149 of I.P.C would come in aid to convict other accused to whom the specihc overt-acts were not attributed. However, sa' the criteria or the condition to invoke Section 149 of I.P.C., is that the prosecution should be in a position to prove the common object in between the accused.

20. According to PW.1 and other eye-witnesses, the Forest Office personnel went to the scene of offence and on seeing the office personnel, the villagers, who were in the fields protested and allegedly attacked the office personnel However, specifrc overt-acts are attributed only to accused Nos.1 and 2. 20

21. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijag Pandurang lhakre a. Sta,te of Maharashtral , hel'1that in the absence c,l any evidence of conspiracy or any objr:ct being estabiisherl, llie accused would be liable for their ir.dividual acts. Moreove;-, there must be an unlawful assembly. Such offence rnrrst have been committed in pursuanc() of the common obje.r:t of the assembly, or must be sucl. as the members of the assembly knew to be likely to be com mitted. E: .t

22. As st-atr-.,1 by the witnesses, the accused and other villagers i:id gone to the place and attacked the Fort,st oflice personne[. It r]1nnot be said, in the present facts of the case, that ali the ac<:used entertained common intention tc; kill the deceased [n fact, it was only accused No. 1, rvho inflicted injuries c'n the head of the deceased with an a_xe. Ir. is also stated by the witnesses that accused No.2 has bee.ten the deceased ."vith ,t stick. There was no prior concert or pre-plan to commi,- the -rrurder of the deceased. Even according to the witnesses, P\,['. 1, deceased and other officers have gathered at the fort:st ar,la on the basis of the information. None of the '1zorz; a scc :rz i l I I' I I i I I ::Il 2l accused had aly clue regarding the arrival of the ofhcers. What a-11 happened at the scene of offence is on the spur of moment and the officials were attacked by the villagers, who were agitated for the reason of not providing or allocating the surplus land to them for cultivation.

23. It cannot be said that all the accused gathered with the common object of killing the deceased. Several villagers, other than the appellants have attacked the vehicles and s:- r other ofhcers. In the said situation, when it was accused No.l, who had attacked the deceased with an axe, the common object of all the appellants cannot be inferred. The appellants, other than accused Nos.1 and 2, were convicted on the basis of recoveries effected at their instance- None of the witnesses attributed any specific overt-acts to other appellants apart from accused Nos.1 and 2

24. Resultantly, the conviction, in so far as aicused No. 1 is concerned, under Section 3O2 of IPC, is confirmed and he sha11 suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for Life. In so far as, accused No.2 is concerned, he is convicted for the offence under Section 326 of IPC and sentenced to undergo Rigorous :t '-.-'. 22 Imprisonrnent for a period of five (05) years. With regard to the other ac,:used i.e., accused Nos.4, S, Z, B, g, j,ii, 16, 20, 22, 35, anci 3i6 they are convicted under Section 3:)4 of IpC and sentenc,:C to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three (03) year s.

25. Acr:ordirrgly, these Criminal Appeals are partly a11owed. Mir;r--sll11196L1s Petitions, pending if any. sh:,11 stand closed 6:" , One Fair Copy to the Hon'ble Sri Justice K.SURENDER (For His Lordships kind perusal) One Fair Copy to ther Hon'ble Sri Justice E.V.VENUGOPAL (For His Lordships kind perusal) //TRUE COPY// Sd/- K. SFIINIVASA RAO .JOIN'T REGISTRAR SEC:ION OFFIGER To,

1. The Spec,ial Sr..r;sions Judge for Trial of Cases under the SC'; & STs (POA) Act Cum-'/lll Additional Sessions Judge at Nizamabad.

2. The ll Addit onal Judicial Magistrate of Firsl Class, Nizamabad 3. The Supe rirrterrclent, District Jail, Nizamabad 4. 11 LR Cooies 5. The Under liecnrtary, Union of lndia Ministry of law, Justice anrl Company Affairs, Ner,r, Dr:lhi.

6. The Secreiary AJr'ocates Association (TG) Library, High Court Buildiigs Hyderabad. 7. One CC to {lri Il.Prashanth , Advocate (OPUC) B. One CC to M/s l\hamed Ghori Fiaze,Advocate (OPUC) 9. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telarrgana at Hyderabad. (OLJ-t)

10. Two CD Cooier; Ks/plp HIGH COURT' DATED:0610212025 ,l GOMMON JUDGMENT q J rH E: = -:--- rAiir:\\ -'x.\ G.. '(' 0z APn 2025 Jt t , €(t €s pniCr' CRLA.No.I 188, 1194 AND 1359 OF 2017 ANI) 174 of 2018 PARTLY ALLOWING THE CRL.A. /\.Iw ,A