THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.199 OF 2009 Date: 5th November, 2011 Between: Bejawada Rama …..Petitioner And Uppauthala Venkateswara Rao and others …..Respondents THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.199 OF 2009 ORDER: The Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner/P.W.1 against the order of acquittal passed in C.C.No.434 of 2007 dated 17.7.2008 on the file of the IV Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur (for short, “Lower Court’). On behalf of the prosecution,P.Ws.1 to P.W.10 were examined and marked as Exs.P.1 to P.12. On behalf of the defence, Exs.D.1 to D4 were marked. After the evidence of prosecution, the accused were examined and the Lower Court acquitted the accused. Challenging the said acquittal, the present revision is filed. The point that arises for consideration is whether the acquittal of the accused recorded by the lower court is legal and sustainable? POINT: According to the case of the prosecution, the accused Nos.3 and 4 had quarrel with P.Ws.1 and 2 on the ground that the accused No.3 has encouraged the creditors of P.W.1 to demand their debts and as a consequence of it, on 6.8.2007 at about 10 a.m. when P.W.1 was at home, the accused attacked and caused injuries to P.Ws.1 to 3. The incident is said to have been witnessed by P.Ws.4 to 8. During the trial, the independent witnesses i.e. P.Ws.4 to 8 did not support the prosecution case and they are treated as hostile witnesses. So far as the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3 is concerned, their evidence corroborates with each other. According to the evidence before the court P.W.1 is stated to have been beaten by the accused with a wooden plank on her head and P.Ws.2 and 3 have also beaten by them in the same way. But, a perusal of the F.I.R. clearly goes to show that accused No.1 was armed with a stick and caused injuries to P.W.1. Therefore, it is a material variation in the prosecution case and also the weapon used in causing the injuries. The lower court felt that the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 7 is not corroborative and more so when independent witnesses have not supported, the prosecution does not rely upon such an evidence. Further more, even as per the complaint P.W.1 is indebted to others and possibility of indebtedness to some of the accused is also not ruled out and therefore, the nature of the complaint has got its own defects. The judgment of the lower court is not perverse and there are no grounds to interfere with the order of acquittal. Therefore, there are no merits in the revision case. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. ____________________________ N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO, J 5th November, 2011 TJMR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.199 OF 2009 DATE: 05-11-2011 TJMR