The appellant-accused no.2 was convicted under Sections 148 and 302 of the IPC for the murder of Shiva Prasad Reddy. Eleven accused were involved, with some acquitted and others receiving convictions. Despite initial intentions to apply for permanent remission, the appellant decided to continue the appeal on merits. Key witnesses, PW1, PW2, and PW3, provided consistent and reliable testimony, corroborated by medical evidence. The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was granted one month to surrender, with the possibility of remission to be considered thereafter.

1. Background and Charges:

• Appellant-Accused No.2's Conviction:
  • Convicted under Sections 148 and 302 IPC.
  • Involved in the murder of Shiva Prasad Reddy.
  • Eleven accused initially charged.
  • Charges under Sections 120B, 148, and 302 IPC.
• Trial Court Proceedings:
  • Accused nos. 5 and 9 died during the trial.
  • Charges under Section 120B not proven.
  • Accused nos. 6, 7, and 8 acquitted.
  • Accused nos. 1 to 4, 10, and 11 convicted.

2. Appeal and Remission:

• Co-Accused Appeals:
  • Criminal Appeal nos. 2130 and 2131 of 2011 disposed of due to permanent remission.
• Appellant's Initial Bail and Surrender Decision:
  • Appellant enlarged on bail.
  • Initially decided to surrender for permanent remission consideration.
• Change of Mind and Appeal on Merits:
  • Appellant chose to continue appeal on merits.

3. Incident and Witness Testimonies:

• Incident Details:
  • Murder occurred on 26th July 1997.
  • Deceased was a lawyer and contested an election against appellant-accused no.2.
  • Deceased suspected of causing a raid leading to the appellant's resentment.
• Eyewitnesses:
  • PW1 and PW3 (deceased's brothers) and PW2.
  • Described attack by accused with hunting sickles.
  • PW1 to PW3's testimony consistent and reliable.
  • PW4 to PW6 did not support prosecution and were declared hostile.

4. Submissions and Evidence:

• Defense Arguments:
  • PW1 and PW3 were interested witnesses.
  • Alleged no motive established by prosecution.
  • Claimed no evidence against appellant if PW1 to PW3 testimony discarded.
• Prosecution Support:
  • Respondent-State supported impugned judgment.
• Court's Consideration:
  • No contradictions or omissions in PW1 to PW3 testimony.
  • PW1 to PW3 provided specific roles of each accused.
  • Medical evidence corroborated injuries caused by hunting sickles.
  • No delay in lodging the complaint by PW1.
  • Recovery of hunting sickles with human blood.

5. Judgement and Directions:

• Appeal Dismissal:
  • Appeal dismissed due to consistent and reliable witness testimony and corroborative evidence.
• Surrender and Remission Consideration:
  • Appellant granted one month to surrender.
  • Respondent-State to consider permanent remission based on applicable policy within two months of surrender.