IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1361 OF 2010 Between: Pillalamarri Janamma … PETITIONER And State of Andhra Pradesh and others … RESPONDENTS This Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1361 OF 2010 ORDER: 1. This revision petition is sought to be filed by the de facto complainant, who is mother of the deceased, against finding of acquittal recorded by judgment, dated 30.06.2008, by the III Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Ranga Reddy District. The respondents 2 and 3/A1 and A2 are accused of offence punishable under Section 306 I.P.C. in the lower Court. After full-fledged trial, the lower Court acquitted A1 and A2 of the said offence. This Court while exercising jurisdiction under Section 397 Cr.P.C., cannot alter the finding of acquittal into one of conviction, as the Section 401 (3) Cr.P.C. 2. A1 is wife of Bangaraiah, PW.2. It is alleged that after her marriage, A1 started insisting the deceased Narsimha and his mother - PW.1 to live separately and to stop his studies and that A2, who is brother of A1, was supporting A1 and that unable to bear humiliation and abetment of A1 and A2, the deceased committed suicide on 29.03.2006 by hanging himself to the ceiling fan at his house. 3. It is contended by the petitioner’s counsel that the lower Court did not discuss evidence of PW.3 with regard to the circumstances leading to suicide of the deceased. The lower Court had gone through evidence of PW.3 in detail and held that the prosecution allegations do not constitute the offence under Section 306 I.P.C. When it is a matter relating to assessment of evidence, this Court in this revision petition cannot re-undertake the same. It may be done in case the prosecution is going to file any appeal against acquittal. As the matter now stands, in this revision petition the petitioner could not point out any procedural irregularity resulting in failure of justice. Thus, there are no grounds in this revision petition to interfere with order of acquittal recorded by the lower Court. 4. Hence, the Criminal Revision Petition is dismissed. ___________________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J August 03, 2010 MD HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1361 OF 2010 August 03, 2010