IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH: HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF OCTOBER, TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1290 OF 2009 BETWEEN: The State of A.P., rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad …. Appellant AND Ingilala Vajram S/o. Ragavaiah …. Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1290 OF 2009 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Appeal under Section 378 (1) & (3) Cr.P.C. is filed by the appellant - State against the judgment dated 11-04-2008 in S.C. No.167 of 2006 passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Gudur, whereunder and whereby the accused was found not guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 290, 323 and 354 IPC and acquitted of the same. 2. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the appeal may be stated as follows: On 23-06-2005 at about 5-00 PM, PW-1 Smt. K. Reddy Subhashini was selling toddy at Govendapalli bus stop, the accused – respondent came to her and asked one mug of toddy on credit and she refused to give the same. Then the accused got angry and one B. Mallikarjuna requested her to give toddy to the accused on his credit, thereafter she gave a mug of toddy to the accused and after taking half mug of toddy, the accused poured the same into the toddy pot. When PW.1 questioned him about the same, he abused her in vulgar language and beat her. On hearing her cries, public rushed to the spot and the accused ran away. After returning home, she informed the same to her husband and on 24-06-2005 at 9-00 AM PW.1, along with her husband, reported the matter to the Police of Kota. The Sub- Inspector of Police, Kota registered a case in Crime No.45 of 2005 and took up investigation. Police visited the scene of offence, prepared rough sketch, examined the witnesses, recorded their statements and filed charge sheet under Sections 290, 323 and 354 IPC against the accused. 3. When charges under Sections 290, 354 and 323 IPC were framed, read over and explained to the accused in Telugu, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 4. To substantiate its case, the prosecution examined PW.1 and got marked Exs.P-1 and P-2. On behalf of the accused, no oral or documentary evidence was adduced. 5. The trial Court after consideration of the evidence, found the accused not guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 290, 323 and 354 IPC on the ground that PW.1 did not support the case of the prosecution and she has given a complete go bye to her earlier statement and accordingly acquitted him. Challenging the same, this appeal is filed. 6. Admittedly, PW.1 did not support the case of the prosecution and gave a complete go bye to her earlier version. She also denied the contents of the report filed by her. Therefore, there is absolutely no evidence to show that the accused committed offences punishable under Sections 290, 323 and 354 IPC. The trial Court has rightly acquitted the accused. There are no compelling or substantial reasons to set aside the order of acquittal of the trial Court. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed confirming the judgment dated 11-04-2008 in S.C. No.167 of 2006 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Gudur. _____________ K.C. BHANU, J October 23, 2009. KTL