Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
C. Sreenivasa Reddy, vs The State Of Ap Rep By Its Pp Hyd., on 17 February, 2022
Bench: K Suresh Reddy
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY
CRL.R.C.427 OF 2008
ORDER:-
Questioning the judgment passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Hindupur, dated 31-12-2007 in
Crl.A.No.58 of 2007, the petitioner/accused filed the present
Criminal Revision Case.
2. The case of the prosecution is as follows:-
PW.1 was working as a Medical Officer in Government
General Hospital, Hindupur. He is also running a private clinic.
While so, on 02-11-2004 at about 1.00 P.M one Kuruba
Eswaramma came to the clinic of Pw.1 as she was suffering with
pain at her left thigh as she fell down when she was kicked by a
she-buffalo. Pw.1 gave treatment to her. On 03-11-2004 Pw.1
went to his duty in GGH, Hindupur. While Pw.1 was on duty, the
petitioner, who is the friend to the son of Kuruba Eswaramma,
went to the hospital and picked up a quarrel with Pw.1 and
abused him in filthy language and caught hold of his shirt and
beat him with hands and legs. Thereafter, Pw.1 gave a report to
the police, who in turn registered a case in Cr.No.135 of 2004
under Section 353 IPC. After completion of investigation, the
police filed charge sheet.
3. The case was numbered as CC.No.197 of 2005 on the file
of the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Hindupur. In
support of the case of the prosecution, the prosecution examined
Pws.1 to 4 and marked Exs.P-1 to P-6. After closure of evidence,
2
the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., for which
he denied.
4. After considering the evidence on record, the trial
Magistrate found the petitioner/accused guilty for the offence
under Section 353 IPC and sentenced him to pay a fine of
Rs.1000/-. In default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one
month. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner/accused filed
Criminal Appeal i.e., Crl.A.No.58 of 2007 before the Additional
Sessions Judge, Hindupur. After considering the entire material
on record, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hindupur
dismissed the appeal, by judgment dated 31-12-2007. Aggrieved
by the same, the present Criminal Revision Case is filed.
5. Heard Sri Kata Sambasiva Rao, learned counsel for the
petitioner/accused and Sri Soora Venkata Sainath, learned
Special Assistant Public Prosecutor.
6. This court perused the entire material on record. As seen
from the evidence, except Pw.1 the other independent witness
did not support the prosecution version. There is no evidence to
show whether Pw.1 received any injury. According to the
prosecution version, the accused caught hold of the shirt of Pw.1
and dragged him and thereafter beat him with hands and legs.
At least the investigating agency did not even seize the shirt of
Pw.1. Except oral assertion of Pw.1 stating that the accused
caught hold of his shirt and dragged him and beat him with
hands and legs, absolutely there is no other material
corroborating the said version. In the circumstances, the
3
prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused under
Section 353 IPC. Further, as can be seen from the record, Pws.2
to 4 are none other than the colleagues of PW.1. In that view of
the matter, the petitioner is entitled for a benefit of doubt.
7. In the above circumstances, the conviction and sentence
recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Hindupur in C.C.No.197 of 2005, which was confirmed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hindupur in Crl.A.No.58 of
2007 is hereby set aside and accused is found not guilty for the
offence under Section 353 IPC. The fine amount paid by the
petitioner/accused, if any, is directed to be refunded to him.
8. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed.
Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed
in consequence.
__________________
K.SURESH REDDY,J
17-02-2022
.
TSNR
