Injury Timing and Nature Crucial in Upholding Conviction: High Court of Andhra Pradesh Reduces Sentence in House Trespass and Attempted Murder Case
The High Court of Andhra Pradesh dealt with the legality and propriety of the conviction under Sections 451, 307, and 393 of the IPC, affirming the decisions of the lower courts but modifying the sentence considering the prolonged pendency of the case and the age of the petitioner.
Facts and Issues: Madipalli Venkata Rao, the petitioner, was convicted for house trespass, attempted murder, and robbery. He allegedly trespassed into the house of P.W.1, threatened her for money and jewelry, and attempted to murder her. The case primarily hinged on the testimony of the victim, her family members, and neighbors, along with medical evidence of the injuries sustained.
The Court observed that the Principal Assistant Sessions Judge and Additional Sessions Judge had correctly appreciated the evidence.
The petitioner’s defence of false implication was dismissed. His version during Section 313 Cr.P.C examination was not corroborated by evidence or during cross-examination.
Medical evidence was pivotal. The Medical Officer’s testimony confirmed the timing and nature of injuries on both the victim and the petitioner, contradicting the defence’s claim regarding the timing and manner of receiving injuries.
Decision: While the conviction under Sections 451, 307, and 393 IPC was affirmed, the High Court reduced the sentence from five years to three years for each offence, considering the prolonged pendency and the age of the petitioner. The fine and default sentence remained unchanged.
Date of Decision: 1st March 2024
Madipalli Venkata Rao @ Konda Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
