THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N. RAO NALLA Criminal Revision Case No.314 of 2005 ORDER: This Criminal Revision Case is filed against the judgment, dated 11.10.2000 in Sessions Case No.125 of 2000 on the file of the Court of IV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hydeabad, whereby and whereunder the accused (A2) was found not guilty for the offence punishable under Section 395 IPC and was acquitted. 2. The case against A1, A3 and A5 has been committed by the XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad vide P.R.C.No.10/95 to the court of Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. The Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad has taken the case on file as Sessions Case No.83 of 1996 and made over the same to the Court of IV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad after separating the case of A2 and A4. That subsequently, the case of A2 was committed to the court of Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, vide P.R.C.No. 29 of 95 who in turn made over the same to the IV Additional Metropolitan Sessions, Hyderabad in S.C.No.125 of 2000 for trial and disposal according to law. 3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 22.11.1993, A2 along with other accused armed with knives, toy pistols went to the house of LW.3- Smt.Shanti situated at A.P. Housing Board Colony, Bagh Lingampally, Hyderabad. A2 and A4 went inside of the house with armed knives and pistols. A1, A3 and A5 were standing outside at main entrance of the door with deadly weapons so as to meet the challenge either from inside or outside and to caution their associates A2 and A.4. They created atmosphere of fear in the house and threatened the inmates with dire consequences posing themselves as Naxalites of P.W.G. Group. A2 and A4 robbed gold ornaments from the house of Smt.Shanthi and decamped with the booty. On 2.6.1994, PW.1 lodged a complaint with Chikkadpally Police Station and the same was registered as Crime No.245/94. Police investigated the matter and laid charge sheet for offence punishable under Section 395 IPC against all the accused. 4. The trial court after taking into consideration the evidence brought on record, held that the prosecution has miserably failed to bring home the guilty of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 395 IPC beyond all reasonable doubt and acquitted the accused. Hence,this Criminal Revision Case is filed by defacto complainant-PW.1. 5. Today, when the matter is called, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner is not present and there is no representation. Hence, the matter is disposed of on merits. 6. PW.1 is the Manager of N.F.C. He stated that on 22.11.1993 at about 7.00 p.m, while returning home from his office, he pressed calling bell of his house. His daughter Shanti came and opened the door. The moment he entered the house, some one from his behind bolted the door from inside. He found two strangers inside the house and they were present in the hall. One person was standing in front of him and another person was standing behind him. Both the persons told him that they belong to People’s War Group and they were working for the uplift of down trodden and socially backward class people and that they needed money and asked him to give gold jewellery or cash. They further told him that they had big group and the other members of the group were surrounding his house. They further told him that if PW.1 did not give the gold and money immediately and send them away, the other members waiting outside would move into action, and both of them were having a revolver and threatened him by pointing the revolver at his daughter. Being afraid of the said persons, he asked his wife to give her gold bangles to the culprits, and his daughter gave one gold chain to them. One of the culprits took away his daughter into his bed room where an almirah was there and his daughter was made to open the Almirah, and the culprits took away one small gold chain with pended diamond, one small gold bangle, one gold ring and two rolled gold ear tops, one gold ring and cash of Rs.900/-. 7. The evidence of PW.2 is that she is wife of PW.1. That on 22.11.1993 at about 6.00 p.m. two strangers came to their house and pressed the calling bell and her son-in-law opened the door and both the strangers entered their house. After entering the house, the strangers closed the door and bolted it from inside and sat in the hall. PW.2 thought that the two strangers came to her house on some work with her husband (PW.1) and she did not talk to them. Thirty minutes later, her husband (PW.1) came and pressed the calling bell. His son-in-law opened the door and her husband entered the house. Those two strangers asked her husband to give all the cash and gold jewellery by pointing revolver at him. Then her husband asked her to give her gold bangles and then she gave four gold bangles to the culprits. The culprits took his son-in-law into the room where the almirah was kept and his son-in-law was forced to open the almirah by the culprits, after opening the almirah the culprits took away one gold bangle, one small gold bangle, one small gold ring, one gold chain, one rolled gold ring, two rolled gold ear rings and cash of Rs.900/-. 8. The evidence of PW.2 is not in conformity with the evidence of PW.1. There is inconsistency as to opening of the door as well as almirah etc. 9. PW.1 stated that one of the culprits took away his daughter into his bed room where an Almirah was there and his daughter was made to open the Almirah, and the culprits took away one small gold chain with pended diamond, one small gold bangle, one gold ring and two rolled gold ear tops, one gold ring and cash of Rs.900/-. Whereas PW.2 stated that the culprits took his son- in- law into the room where the almirah was kept and his son-in law was forced to open the almirah by the culprits, after opening the almirah the culprits took away one gold bangle, one small gold bangle, one small gold ring, one gold chain, one rolled gold ring, two rolled gold ear rings and a cash of Rs.900/-. 10. The incident took place on 22.11.1993, but PW.1 gave complaint to police on 2.6.1994. PW.1 deposed that in the month of July,1994 he was called to Central prison, Musheerabad Jail for identifying the culprits in the presence of Magistrate, but he could not identify the culprits in the Test Identification Parade. 11. Further, PW.2 stated that ten days prior to the identification of the property, the police came to her house and gave the gold for obtaining the jewels prepared. She gave the particulars of the culprits to the police when she was examined on the next day of giving the complaint. The police brought the culprits to their house and showed them to her before conducting the Test Identification Parade by the Magistrate. 12. In view of her evidence, no importance can be attached to her testimony that she identified the accused before the Magistrate and also she identified the articles M.Os 1 to 8. The evidence of PWS 3 and 4 -punch witnesses, is of no consequence. The evidence of PW.6 is that the accused never resided in her house as a tenant and she has not seen the accused at any time. PW.5, PW.8 are the official witnesses. The evidence of PW.7 cannot be taken into account in view of the fact that the police had brought the culprits to PWs 1 and 2’s house before conducting the Test Identification Parade. 13. This revisional court is aware that the court has got to be careful and cautious in dealing with and in disposing of cases of acquittal. In other words, the court has to tread cautiously in deciding the fate of accused in cases of acquittal as it affects the life and liberty of the accused. 14. In the facts, circumstances and evidence as referred to hereinabove, this court is convinced that the impugned order dated 11.10.2000 passed in S.C. No. 125 of 2000 by the IV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, does not suffer from any error, irregularity, infirmity and/or illegality and as such, the same is not liable to be interfered with, in any manner. 15. In the result, the Criminal Revision Case fails and the same is hereby dismissed. ________________ B.N.RAO NALLA,J -04-2010 Stp