Telangana High Court
The State Of Ap Rep Ab Its Pp Hyd., vs Dunnapothula Nagaraju, on 1 October, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1066 OF 2013
JUDGMENT:
This criminal appeal is filed by appellant/state
aggrieved by the judgment, dated 24.06.2011 in S.C.No.579
of 2009 on the file of the Principal Assistant Sessions Judge,
Warangal, wherein respondent/accused was acquitted for the
offences punishable under Sections 363 and 376 of Indian
Penal Code (for short 'IPC').
2. Heard Mr. Dr.Surepalli Prashanth learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the appellant/State and perused the
record.
3. Briefly, the case of the prosecution is that PW3/victim
was taken by the accused from her house to Mothe Village of
Medak District and stayed there for 12 days. Since PW3 was
missing, a complaint was lodged on 06.01.2009 to the police
by PW1, who is mother of PW3. According to the version of
prosecution, PW3 went along with the accused on 28.12.2008
and they were traced on 06.01.2009 on the date the
complaint was filed.
KS,J
crla_1066_2013
4. On the basis of the complaint, the police examined
PW3/victim and also other witnesses and filed charge sheet.
5. During the course of trial, PWs.1 to 21 were examined
by the prosecution and also marked EXs.P1 to P25.
6. Learned Sessions Judge acquitted the accused on the
following grounds:
a) A part from PW1-mother of PW3 and PW3/victim, all
other witnesses turned hostile to the prosecution case.
b) The proof filed regarding the age of PW3/victim
which is a school certificate cannot be believed.
c) From the conduct of residing along with the accused
for 12 days, consensual sex cannot be ruled out.
7. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that
on medical examination, Doctor found that PW3/victim was
subjected to sexual intercourse and wearing apparel of the
victim contains emission semen and that itself would
suffice to infer that the victim girl was subjected to rape.
For the said reason, the acquittal has to be reversed.
KS,J
crla_1066_2013
8. In cases of acquittal, the interference by the appellate
Court can only be in compelling circumstances. The Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Babu v. State of Kerala 1 held as follows:
"12. In State of Rajasthan v. Naresh @ Ram Naresh
[(2009) 9 SCC 368], the Court again examined the
earlier judgments of this Court and laid down that
an "order of acquittal should not be lightly
interfered with even if the court believes that there
is some evidence pointing out the finger towards
the accused."
13. In State of Uttar Pradesh v. Banne alias
Baijnath & Ors. [(2009) 4 SCC 271], this Court gave
certain illustrative circumstances in which the
Court would be justified in interfering with a
judgment of acquittal by the High Court. The
circumstances includes:
i) The High Court's decision is based on totally
erroneous view of law by ignoring the settled legal
position;
ii) The High Court's conclusions are contrary to
evidence and documents on record;
iii) The entire approach of the High Court in
dealing with the evidence was patently illegal
leading to grave miscarriage of justice;
iv) The High Court's judgment is manifestly
unjust and unreasonable based on erroneous law
and facts on the record of the case;
v) This Court must always give proper weight
and consideration to the findings of the High Court;
vi) This Court would be extremely reluctant in
interfering with a case when both the Sessions
Crl.A.No.104/09, dated 11.08.2010
KS,J
crla_1066_2013
Court and the High Court have recorded an order of
acquittal."
9. It is not in dispute that the accused and victim/PW3
were missing for 12 days. No injuries were found on the body
of the victim and even according to the victim while she
stayed for 12 days, she was free to roam around the premises
and there was sexual intercourse for all 12 days, therefore,
the trial Court found that it was with consent of both. In fact,
the place where PW3 and the accused were residing, there
was no toilet in the house and since there was no toilet in the
house, she used to go out near the main road for the purpose
of using toilet. Even in the cross examination PW3 admitted
that the door was not locked and that the accused used to go
out and bring vegetables without bolting the door. In the said
circumstances when the house was near the main road and
she was free to roam she had a chance to escape and that
itself would speak the consensual relationship with the
accused.
10. In so far as the age is concerned, the prosecution relied
on Ex.P22/date of birth certificate of PW3 which was given by
PW18 who was the principle of the school. PW1-mother of
PW3 admitted that she does not have the date of birth
KS,J
crla_1066_2013
certificate for PW3 and no medical certificate or any
certificate issued by the doctor was placed on record. The
school certificate was based on the declaration given by the
parents of the PW3/victim. When the parents themselves
were not clear about the date of birth, that certificate cannot
be relied upon to assert that it is the correct date of birth.
Admittedly, the victim/PW3 was not sent for the test to
determine her age.
11. I don't find any reasons to interfere with the well
reasoned judgment of the trial Court.
12. Accordingly, this appeal fails and stands dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand
closed.
_________________
K.SURENDER, J
Date: 01.10.2024
Kgk/Mnv
