HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO Criminal Appeal No.1483 OF 2006 DATED: 23.09.2011 BETWEEN: State of A.P. rep.by the Public Prosecutor .. Appellant And Baddula Raja Rao .. Respondent/accused HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO Criminal Appeal No.1483 OF 2006 JUDGMENT: This criminal appeal is filed against the judgment dated 09.07.2004 passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Addanki in S.C.No.43 of 2004 acquitting the respondent/accused for the offences under Sections 366-A and 363 IPC. 2. Aggrieved by the order of acquittal passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, the State preferred the present appeal. 3. I have heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State. There is no representation on behalf of the respondent/accused. 4. The brief facts necessary for considering the present appeal may be stated as follows: The respondent at relevant time was working as lecturer in Physics in M.S.R. Junior College, Ravinuthala and he was also running a private institute to which PW.1 (the victim girl) used to attend tuitions. According to the prosecution, the respondent was expressing his love with PW.1 and was telling her to come along with him leaving her parents’ house, otherwise he would commit suicide. Ultimately, PW.1 being influenced by the proposals made by the respondent, agreed to elope with him. Accordingly, on 12.03.2003 at about 1 AM, the victim girl met the accused and both of them eloped from Ravinuthala village to various places in search of job opportunities and stayed there in the houses of his friends and relatives. The respondent used to introduce PW.1 as his wife to his friends and relatives. Having found no job opportunities, the respondent and PW.1 as agreed, did not have any physical contacts. Ultimately, they returned back to Ongole on 09.04.2003 at 11 AM by train and the respondent was arrested at Ongole Railway Station by the police at the instance of PW.2, father of PW1. Basing on the report lodged by PW.2, a case in Crime No. 4 of 2003 was registered against the respondent under Section 366 of IPC of Korisapadu Police Station, the case was investigated into and a charge sheet came to be filed. 5. In the course of the trial before the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, the prosecution in order to prove the guilt of the accused, examined Pws.1 to 16, marked Exs.P.1 to P.12 and MO1. The respondent did not propose to examine defence any witness, but he marked Exs.D.1 to D8 on his side. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge on considering the entire evidence on record acquitted the appellant for the offences under Sections 366-A and 363 IPC for which he was tried. 6. Now the point for determination in this appeal is whether there are any valid grounds to set aside the order of acquittal passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge? 7. Having gone through the entire material on record, I am of the view that the appeal can be disposed of solely basing on the evidence of PW.1 and Ex.P.9-SSC certificate relating to PW.1 marked by the prosecution. PW.1 had categorically stated in her evidence before the learned trial Court that she on her own accord eloped with the respondent and visited several places along with him in search of job and ultimately returned back to Ongole. She also stated in her evidence that during her stay with the respondent, there was no physical contact between them. She also stated in her evidence that she was aged 17 years on the date when she left along with the respondent. Ex.P.9-SSC certificate marked by the prosecution shows that the date of birth of PW.1 is 13.08.1986. The incident took place on 12.03.2003. Therefore, on the date of incident, PW.1 completed 17 years. As per the prosecution case itself and also the evidence of PW.1 clearly reveals that the victim girl was aged 19 years on the date of offence and she voluntarily left her parents’ house and went along with the respondent to various places and also there being no physical contact between both of them, either the offence under Section 366 IPC or the offence under Section 363 IPC is not attracted. Therefore, the learned trial Court rightly acquitted the appellant for the offences under Sections 363 and 366(1) of IPC. 8. For the aforementioned reasons, the order of acquittal dated 09.07.2004 passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Addanki in S.C.No.43 of 2004 is confirmed and the appeal preferred by the State is dismissed. __________________ Date: 23.09.2011 R. KANTHA RAO, J Kvrm HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO Criminal Appeal No.1483 OF 2006 DATE: 23.09.2011