THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.221 OF 2010. DATED: 10-02-2010. Between: State of A.P. rep. By Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. Hyderabad. … Appellant/Complainant and A.Nageswara Rao … Respondent/Accused THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.221 OF 2010. JUDGMENT: This Criminal Appeal by the State under Section 378 (1) and (3) Cr.P.C., is preferred against the judgment, dated 03-12-2008, in S.C.No.57 of 2008, on the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Pithapuram, in acquitting the respondent-accused of the offences punishable under Sections 447, 354, 323 and 506 IPC. 2. Brief facts, that are necessary for disposal of the present Criminal Appeal, may be stated as follows: Originally the de facto complainant filed a private complaint before the Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Tuni and the same was forwarded to police under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. for investigation and thereafter, police filed charge sheet. It is alleged in the charge sheet that there is a joint property to an extent of Ac.0.40 cents in S.No.299/15 belonging to the accused and his brothers. One Gopala Krishna, who is the elder brother of the accused sold away his part of the land to the husband of the complainant. As the rates of the lands were increased, the accused disputed with the complainant. On 08-06-2007, the accused trespassed into the land of the complainant when she was clearing the bushes, altercated with her, abused her in filthy language and caught her tuft of hair and pulled her saree. P.Ws. 2 to 5 witnessed the same and separated the accused and admonished him. Hence, the charge. 3. When charges under Sections 447, 354,323 and 506 IPC were framed, read over and explained to the accused in Telugu, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 4. To substantiate the charges, the prosecution examined P.Ws. 1 to 5 and got marked Exs.P1 to P6. 5. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. with reference to the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. He denied the same. No oral evidence was adduced on behalf of the accused except marking Ex.D1. 6. The trial Court upon consideration of entire oral and documentary evidence available on record acquitted the accused. Challenging the same, State preferred this appeal. 7. Now the point that arises for consideration is whether the prosecution proved its case against the accused of the charges under Sections 447,354, 323 and 506 IPC and whether the judgment of the trial Court is legal, correct and proper? 8. Counsel representing the learned Public Prosecutor contended that the evidence of P.W.1 is very clear that the accused outraged the modesty of P.W.1, that there is no other reason to disbelieve the evidence of P.W.1 and hence, she prays to set aside the order of acquittal. 9. While dealing with the order of acquittal, though the appellate Court has got full power to re-appreciate the evidence, but it will be slow in interfering with the same in view of the fact that there is a presumption under law that the accused is presumed to be innocent unless contrary is proved and that presumption of innocence is further strengthened by an order of acquittal. Unless the findings are improper or illegal or incorrect, ordinarily this Court would not interfere with the same. 10. The entire case rests upon the evidence of P.W.1. Admittedly, there are disputes between P.W.1 and the accused prior to the incident. It is an admitted fact that the wife of the accused filed a complaint against P.W.1 before the Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Tuni and P.W.1 was arrested by the police. The report given by the wife of the accused would reveal that P.W.1 beat her and the wife of the accused was referred to Government hospital for treatment. P.Ws. 3 and 4 were shown as eyewitnesses in the complaint. There is evidence on record which would go to show that the houses of P.Ws. 3 and 4 are not situated near the scene of offence. Even they did not support the case of the prosecution. The evidence of P.W.1 would go to show that the incident took place at about 6.00 or 6.30 P.M., whereas P.W.2 stated that the incident took place at about 9.00 or 10.00 A.M. Even police have not registered the case. Therefore, P.W.1 filed private complaint before the Court and the same was referred to police for investigation. In that complaint, it is stated that the incident had taken place in the evening time. So it is a material contradiction with regard to time of offence. Even though some variations would be there with regard to timings, but it is a case where there is a variation with regard to time of offence. In the evidence, it is stated that the incident took place in the morning, whereas in the earliest report, it is stated that the incident had taken place in the evening. Therefore, the evidence of P.W.1 cannot be put in the category of wholly reliable. Hence, her evidence requires corroboration. There is no such corroboration in this case. Therefore, it is not safe to place an implicit reliance on the evidence of P.W.1 alone to base a conviction. The trial Court after consideration of evidence on record, rightly acquitted the accused and there are no grounds to interfere with the same. 11. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed at the stage of admission confirming the judgment, dated 03-12-2008, in S.C.No.57 of 2008, on the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Pithapuram --------------------- K.C.BHANU, J DATED:10-02-2010 Hsd