THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1154 of 2013 23-01-2014 BETWEEN:
State of A.P., Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad, …..Appellant AND Dasari Yadaiah …..Respondent THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING JUDGMENT: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1154 of 2013 JUDGMENT:
This Criminal Appeal is preferred by the State challenging the Judgment dated 23.04.2010 passed in S.C. No.88 of 2008 by the Hon’ble Assistant Sessions Judge, Miryalaguda, whereby the learned Judge acquitted the accused for the offence under Section 376 IPC.
The case of the prosecution is as follows:
When the victim lady, after attending calls of nature, was returning the accused caught hold of her right hand, dragged and slumped her on the ground pressed her neck, the accused overpowered her and raped her, and later the accused warned her with dire consequences. She informed the incident to her mother, P.W.5, who inturn informed the same to P.W.8 and the victim stayed with her mother in her village. Next day, her husband, P.W.2 came to her and on enquiry, the victim lady informed the same to him, and then, they lodged a complaint. On receipt of the complaint, a case was registered against the accused for an offence under Section 376 IPC and the matter was investigated into. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed.
To substantiate the case of the prosecution, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 15 and marked Exs.P.1 to P.9 and M.Os.1 to 3.
No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the accused.
On appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court acquitted the accused/respondent on the following grounds.
(a) The place of occurrence as per Ex.P.1, complaint;
as per the deposition of P.W.1, and as per the observation panchanama are different. When three places are introduced by the prosecution with regard to place of occurrence, it creates a suspicion in the mind of the Court.
(b) Secondly, in the absence of injuries alleged to have been sustained by the victim lady, not noticed by the Doctor and in the absence of F.S.L report in support of finding any semen spermatozoa from the vaginal smear, the prosecution has failed to show that the victim lady was subjected to rape.
(c) Further, there is a delay of one day in lodging the complaint. It is the case of the P.W.1 that immediately after the commission of rape, she has gone to her mother, P.W.5, and informed the same. She stated that she waited till her husband comes in the next day. Nothing prevented her to lodge the complaint when she was staying with her mother. The prosecution has not explained the delay sufficiently in lodging the complaint. On this ground also, the learned Judge has acquitted the accused.
Heard both sides and perused the entire material available on record.
On perusing the entire evidence and hearing the learned Public Prosecutor, this Court is of the view that the trial Court has considered the evidence in proper perspective and the reasoning given above while acquitting the accused is also in accordance with law. The Judgment of the trial Court does not suffer any perverse findings and the acquittal recorded by the trial Court needs no interference by this Court.
The criminal appeal fails and is liable to be dismissed.
The Criminal Appeal is accordingly dismissed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending in this appeal, shall stand dismissed.
JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO 23.01.2014 pln