THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO. 503 OF 2005 ORDER:- This criminal revision is filed questioning the judgment dated 23.11.2004 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 28 of 2002 (Old Criminal Appeal No. 223 of 1998) on the file of the II Additional Sessions Judge (FTC-I) Khammam modifying the sentence of imprisonment to three years from seven years imposed by the Court of Assistant Sessions Judge, Sathupalli in Sessions Case No. 82 of 1993. The appellant herein is accused in Crime No. 61 of 1991 registered against him under section 376 of Indian Penal Code. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the accused and victim girl were residents of Penuballi and known to each other and on 15.11.1991 at about 11.00 A.M. while the victim girl was washing cloths, the accused forcibly took her to nearby mango garden and committed rape on her person and again on 17.11.1991 at about 2.00 P.M., he called the victim girl to his house and committed rape on her person. She returned home and informed the same to her mother and on the advise of elders a complaint was filed and a case in Crime No. 61 of 1991 was registered under section 376 of Indian Penal Code. Upon completion of investigation, the police filed a charge sheet. After completion of trial, the Assistant Sessions Judge, Sathupalli, considering the evidence available on record, convicted the accused under section 235 (2) of Criminal Procedure Code for offences punishable under section 376 of Indian penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.200/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. As against the said judgment, the accused preferred an appeal in Criminal Appeal No.38 of 2002 and the lower Appellate Court/ II Additional Sessions Judge (FTC-I) Khammam by orders dated 23.11.2004 on re-appreciation of the matter, while confirming the conviction, partly allowed the appeal by modifying the sentence of imprisonment and reduced it to three years from seven years as imposed by the trial Court. As against the said order, the present criminal revision case is filed. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record. P.W.1 is mother of the victim girl and P.W.2 is the victim girl. Admittedly as per the records, the age of the victim at the time of occurrence of the alleged offence is 24 years, which is also stated by her in her chief examination. In her evidence, P W 2 stated that she was subjected to rape by the accused on two occasions and on said two occasions, two of her friends were present, however, surprisingly, the prosecution has not examined them. The victim girl is married by the time of occurrence of the incident. P.W.12 who is Civil Assistant Surgeon and has examined the victim girl, in her evidence stated that on requisition from the concerned police she examined the victim girl and noted that there are no external injuries, no fresh bleeding present and that there are no signs of recent intercourse. A perusal of the record and the narration of the events goes to show that the victim girl may be a consenting party to the said occurrence. It is also seen that due to motivation on the part of P.W.1/mother of the victim, the said case is proceeded with by the investigating agency. Having regard to the above discrepancies it cannot be said that the petitioner has committed rape and the victim girl in all probabilities may be a consenting party to the alleged incidence and the conviction and sentence imposed on the petitioner is liable to be set aside. Accordingly the conviction and sentence imposed on the petitioner is set aside In the result, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed. _____________ RAJA ELANGO,J DATE: 18.1.2011 TVK THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO. 503 OF 2005 Date: 18.1.2010