Skip to content


In Re: Butari Chinna Vobiah - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in9Ind.Cas.288
AppellantIn Re: Butari Chinna Vobiah
Excerpt:
penal code (act xlv of 1860), section 302 - murder--several accused--no evidence as to who struck the fatal blow--conviction--sentence. - .....the defence alleged that the murder was committed by some unknown strangers. we have no doubt that prosecution witnesses nos. 1 and 2 were present at the time and that they were telling the truth when they say the appellants were the murderers. by 8-30 p.m., prosecution witness no. 1 was giving a statement to the sub-magistrate at kadiri five miles from the scene of offence, and this after a visit to his own village on the way and in this the appellants were implicated. much has been made of the fact that in that statement, ankigadu was said to have witnessed the beating whereas ankigadu merely says he saw prosecution witness no. 1 running from the village of brahmanapalli and was told by him of the murder. there is in the circumstances nothing very extraordinary in a man like.....
Judgment:

1. The Sessions Judge and the Assessors have found the appellants guilty of the murder of one Sugali Nannegadu and we have no doubt they are right. Nannegadu was admittedly murdered about 6 P.M. outside the Chavadi in the village of Brahmanapalli and while the defence alleged that the murder was committed by some unknown strangers. We have no doubt that Prosecution Witnesses Nos. 1 and 2 were present at the time and that they were telling the truth when they say the appellants were the murderers. By 8-30 P.M., prosecution Witness No. 1 was giving a statement to the Sub-Magistrate at Kadiri five miles from the scene of offence, and this after a visit to his own village on the way and in this the appellants were implicated. Much has been made of the fact that in that statement, Ankigadu was said to have witnessed the beating whereas Ankigadu merely says he saw Prosecution Witness No. 1 running from the village of Brahmanapalli and was told by him of the murder. There is in the circumstances nothing very extraordinary in a man like prosecution Witness No. 1 mentioning Ankigadu as an eye witness. We consider that the defence evidence that some unknown persons killed the deceased is worthless. We confirm the conviction. The Sessions Judge has sentenced the fifth accused to death on the ground that he struck the fatal blow. There is, however, nothing in the early stages of the case to indicate who struck that blow, and we do not think it safe to rely on the later differentiation of the parts taken by the various appellants. We, therefore, confirm the sentences passed on accused Nos l and 4 and dismiss their appeals and reduce the sentence on the fifth accused to transportation for life.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //