THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1018 OF 2005 DATED 27th JANUARY, 2011. BETWEEN : K.Kanaka Durga & another .. Petitioners- Complainants and The State of A.P. & another ..Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1018 OF 2005 ORDER: This is a revision preferred by the de facto complainant and the victim girl against the order of acquittal passed by the learned Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Eluru, in Sessions Case No.578 of 2001 for the offence under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code by judgment dated 25.01.2005. Heard. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the accused had illicit intercourse with the victim girl Kanaka Durga on 21.04.2001 and the same was witnessed by P.W.1, the father of the victim girl. Subsequently, the parents of the accused were called and a panchayath was held. On refusal of the accused to marry the victim girl, a complaint was lodged by P.W.1 narrating the incident. After evaluating the oral evidence of P.Ws.1 to 12 and documentary evidence of Exs.P.1 to P.13, D.1 and D.2 and MOs 1 to 5, the learned trial Judge acquitted the accused on the grounds that Ex.P.1, which claims to be given by P.W.1, is unbelievable in view of the statement of P.W.3 according to whom the complaint is written by a known person and not by P.W.1 whereas it is the case of P.W.1 that the complaint was lodged by him, but P.W.1 also stated that said complaint before the Court is not written by him. It clearly shows that the genesis of the occurrence is not properly placed before the Court. Further to prove the age of P.W.3, there is no document except the medical certificate produced by the prosecution and further it is the case of P.W.1 that he do not know the date of birth of the victim girl and the victim girl also deposed before the Court that she is not aware of her age. This Court perused the entire material on record and also the evidence of all the witnesses. As rightly observed by the learned trial Judge, the evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.3 is not cogent and it has not inspired the confidence of this Court and further the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the age of the victim girl and prosecution has not made out the specific pleas whether the accused had intercourse with the girl with the consent or without the consent of the victim girl. Apart from all these aspects, in his evidence the doctor, who conducted examination on the victim girl, categorically stated that there is no symptom of recent intercourse on the victim girl even though the victim girl was examined on the same day i.e. on 21.04.2001 itself. In the absence of any evidence to show that on the particular date the accused had sexual intercourse against the will of the victim girl, this Court is of the view that the finding of the trial Court is not suffered with any infirmity or perversity. It is well settled that in a revision against acquittal, the Appellate Court can interfere only when there is possibility of one view, which is pointing towards the guilt of the accused. When there is possibility of two views and one view, which is in favour of the accused, is taken into account and the accused is acquitted by the competent Court, there is no need to interfere with the order passed by the trial Court. Considering the above said proposition of law and after perusal of the record and the impugned judgment, this Court is of the view that there is no need to interfere with the order of acquittal passed by the learned trial Judge. Hence, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. Miscellaneous petitions filed in this Criminal Revision Case, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Dated : 27.01.2011 sur