THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Revision Case No.1466 of 2009 Date : 16-09-2009 Between : Malleti Durga .. Petitioner And Datla Pullarao and 3 others .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Revision Case No.1466 of 2009 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/de facto-complainant and perused the order impugned in the revision. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the evidence of P.W.1 indicates that the accused had sexual intercourse with her against her will and therefore the accused is liable to be prosecuted for the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. I have gone through the evidence of P.W.1, who is victim. She has not stated anywhere that the accused had sexual intercourse with her against her will. Indisputably she was aged 21 years by the date of lodging Ex.P1 Report before the Police. I deem it appropriate to refer the Chief-Examination of P.W.1 in her own words and it is thus: “I am resident of Undi Village. I reside with my parents. I have no job. I know A1 to A3. A1 is son of A2. A3 is elder brother of A1. A1 to A3 are residents of Undi and their house is nearer to my house. I used to attend factory for work for grading of prawns. I used to go to the factory through the way of house of accused. A1 used to follow me by stating that he loves me and he followed for 1 ½ year, which was happened in the year from 2002 and A1 promised me that he would marry me and A1 took me to his home and I was introduced A2 and A3 by A1 and also sister of A1 by name Mani. Since then I used to go to the house of A1 as I was introduced to his family. The mother of A1 i.e., A2 promised me that A1 would marrying and she will perform our marriage. Thus, I acquainted with family of A1 and I used to go to their house for chitchat. A1 and I used to stay in one room and I was very close to A1. Even if we stayed in one room the parents of A1 never objected us to stand distance of A1. A1 used to pull me into the room by holding my hand and used to kiss me for which I did not agree and warned A1 don’t do such things till our marriage. Everyone of the village know the affair between A1 and me inasmuch as I used to go to the house of A1. Then on enquiry my parents came to know this incident and chided me and then I told the entire incident what I used to do with A1 then my parents also agreed to perform marriage with A1. Later in the year 2004, all the accused demanded me a dowry of Rs.2,00,000/- and a motorbike. Unless we offer the said dowry to all accused, they stated A1 would not marrying. Then we stated that we are unable to give such huge amount for which all the accused stated that they would see other marriage proposals for A1 other than me. Having the affair between A1 and me known to entire village, my parents thought my marriage ought have to be done with A1 only for which my parents placed this matter before elders of our village. The witness states that A1 cohabited her for more than 10 times. Having all the accused cheated me to file case against all the accused. The witness identified the report of her. The report of P.W.1 is marked as Ex.P1. The Police examined me recorded my statement. Thus, I was cheated by all the accused.” It is nowhere stated that A1 had sexual intercourse with her against her will. What all she stated is that A1 cohabited with her for more than 10 times. To constitute a rape within the meaning of Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, it must be against her will or without her consent. Both the essential ingredients are absent in this case. Therefore, the trial Court is justified in dismissing the Crl. M.P. filed by the Prosecution. I do not see any flaw in the order impugned. The Criminal Revision Case is accordingly dismissed. ___________________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. 16th September, 2009. skmr