THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1981 of 2004 JUDGMENT: On the basis of a report given by the petitioner herein, who was examined as P.W-1, a case in Crime No.3 of 2002 of Poduru Police Station was registered against respondents 2 to 5 herein for the offences punishable under Sections 306 and 201 IPC and after investigation, the charge sheet was filed and the same was numbered as P.R.C.No.27 of 2002 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Palakol. After committal, it was numbered as S.C.No.11 of 2003 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Narsapur. During the course of trial, on behalf of the prosecution, P.Ws.1 to 11 were examined and Exs.P-1 to P-15 were marked. On behalf of the accused, none was examined and Ex.D-1 was marked. The learned Sessions Judge having analysed the entire evidence, both oral and documentary, came to the conclusion that the prosecution miserably failed to prove the guilt of the accused for the said offences and accordingly, by his judgment, dated 09.07.2004, acquitted them. As the State has not chosen to challenge the order of acquittal of the accused, the de facto complainant, who was examined as P.W-1, filed the present Criminal Revision Case invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 401 Cr.P.C. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows: - There were some disputes and ill-feelings between the deceased and his wife and that the wife of the deceased went to the house of A-1, who is her father, and so, the deceased went to his house and asked A-1 to send his daughter to join him, but A-1 and his other relatives i.e., A-2 to A-4 beat the deceased and abetted him to commit suicide by consuming poison, as a result of which, the deceased vexed with his life, on 05.01.2002, at about 8 p.m., committed suicide by consuming poison and at about 12 hours, his mother found him dead and called her relatives, but the accused took away the dead body of the deceased and buried it at Mattaparru burial ground even during the night time to screen the evidence. Heard both sides. Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the impugned judgment, this Court is of the view that the trial Court was right in holding the accused not guilty of the offences with which they are charged and as such, the impugned judgment needs no interference by this Court. Even if this Court holds that the impugned judgment of the trial Court is erroneous, the maximum which can be done by this Court is to remand the matter to the trial Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law and this Court has no power to reverse the said finding of acquittal to that of conviction. Further, the alleged offence took place on 05.01.2002 i.e., about 9 years back. In those circumstances, this Court is of the view that this is not a fit case for interference and accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA 27th January 2011 DR