IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1337 OF 2009 Between: The Sate of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. ..... Appellant/Petitioner AND Kompalli Butchibabu ..... Accused/Respondent The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: The criminal appeal, under Section 378 (3) & (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed by the State against the judgment, dated 15.05.2007, in S.C.No.20 of 2005, on the file of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Sompeta, whereunder and whereby, the sole accused was found not guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 307 and 324 IPC. 2. Brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the present criminal appeal may be stated as follows: On 10.02.2004 at about 5.00 p.m., the accused visited the shop of his brother Kompalli Venkata Surya Prakasarao (P.W.7) and demanded money for his bad vices. The person present there intervened and pacified the issue and dropped the accused at his house by rickshaw. The accused intentionally dragged the victim/P.W.1 into his house with a view to kill him, locked the doors and attacked him with a knife and thereby caused injuries over his body. Thereafter, P.W.1 escaped from the hands of the accused with the help of one Umapathy Tyadi (P.W.3) who heard the cries of P.W.1 when he went to the house of the accused and rescued P.W.1 by breaking the locks of door. On 11.02.2004, P.Ws.1 and 7 went to the Police Station and lodged a complaint. The complaint given by P.W.1 was registered by the Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, Kasibugga Police Station as a case in Crime No.16 of 2004. The police observed the scene of occurrence and prepared the rough sketch. They arrested the accused. Basing on the confession statement of the accused, the weapon used in the commission of offence was seized and after completion of investigation, the police filed the charge sheet. 3. When the charges under Sections 307 and 324 of 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 case of the prosecution, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 7 and got marked Exs.P1 to P8. 5. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. with reference to the incriminating material found against him in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. He denied the same. On behalf of the accused, no evidence either oral or documentary was adduced. 6. The trial Court, after considering the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt and accordingly acquitted the accused. Hence, this criminal appeal is filed by the State. 7. Heard the learned counsel representing the learned Public Prosecutor. 8. Now the point for determination is whether the prosecution proved its case beyond all reasonable doubt against the accused of the charges under Sections 307 and 324 IPC and whether the judgment of the trial Court is correct, legal and proper? 9. There is a presumption under law that the accused is presumed to be innocent unless the contrary is proved. That presumption is further strengthened by an order of acquittal. Unless there are compelling and substantial reasons, normally this Court would not interfere with the same. 10. P.Ws.1 to 7, who were examined on behalf of the prosecution did not support the case of the prosecution. Their statements, Exs.P2 to P8 respectively, which were recorded by the police during the course of investigation under Section 161(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, were marked. 11. There cannot be any dispute that the statements recorded by the police during the course of investigation cannot be used for any other purpose except for contradicting a witness in the manner as provided under Section 145 of the Indian Evidence Act. Therefore, there is absolutely no evidence to show that the accused is the assailant of P.W.1 or P.W.7. The trial Court rightly acquitted the accused. There are no grounds to interefere with the same. Hence, the criminal appeal is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. 12. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed confirming the judgment, dated 15.05.2007, in S.C.No.20 of 2005, on the file of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Sompeta. _______________ (K.C. BHANU, J) Date: 15th September, 2009 KL