IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1212 OF 2009 Between: The Sate of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. ..... Appellant/Petitioner AND 1. Kagolu Devasahayam 2. Bochu Venkata Seshaiah ..... Accused/Respondents The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: The criminal appeal, under Section 378 (3) & (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed by the State against the judgment, dated 31.01.2005, in S.C.No.475 of 2003, on the file of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Kovur, whereunder and whereby, both the accused were found not guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 342 and 307 read with 34 of IPC. 2. Brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the present criminal appeal may be stated as follows: On 03.03.2003, both the accused took the deceased to the house of A1 and confined him wrongfully and asked him about the whereabouts of one Padma. When he pleaded inability about Padma, they beat him causing injuries. As he fell unconscious, he was taken to private hospital and thereafter, he was shifted to Nellore Government Head Quarters Hospital, Nellore. Basing on the report lodged by P.W.1 on 03.03.2003, the police registered a case under Sections 342 and 307 read with 34 of IPC. He examined the witnesses and sent the injured to the Government Hospital through a constable. Thereafter, he proceeded to the scene of occurrence and observed the scene in the presence of mediators. During the course of investigation, he arrested the accused and after completion of investigation, he filed the charge sheet. 3. When the charges under Sections 342 and 307 read with 34 of IPC were framed, read over and explained to the accused in Telugu, they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 4. To substantiate the charges, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 4 and got marked Exs.P1 to P7. 5. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. with reference to the incriminating material found against them in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. They denied the same. On behalf of the accused, no evidence either oral or documentary was adduced. 6. The trial Court, after considering the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt and accordingly they were acquitted. Hence, this criminal appeal is filed by the State. 7. Now the point for determination is whether the prosecution proved its case beyond all reasonable doubt against the accused of the charges under Sections 342 and 307 read with 34 of IPC and whether the judgment of the trial Court is correct, legal and proper? 8. Heard the counsel representing the learned Public Prosecutor. 9. The victim himself did not support the case of the prosecution. Though it is the case of the prosecution that A1 and A2 wrongfully confined P.W.1 in the house of A1 and that both the accused beat him indiscriminately. But in the witness box, he stated that while he was tapping toddy, at about 9.00 p.m. on the date of incident, two unknown persons beat him with hands and sticks. As a result, he fell unconscious. P.Ws.2 and 3, who were projected as eye witnesses to the incident, did not support the case of the prosecution. They categorically stated that they did not know who beat P.W.1 but they came to know that A1 and A2 beat P.W.1. That is only hear say evidence. P.W.4 is the Investigating Officer whose evidence is not much relevant to show that the accused are the assailants of P.W.1. As P.Ws.1 to 3 were resailing from their earlier statements made to the police, they were cross-examined. Even after the cross-examination, nothing has been elicited from the evidence of these three witnesses to show or infer that the accused are the assailants of P.W.1 or committed any offences under Sections 342 and 307 read with 34 of IPC. Therefore, the trial Court rightly acquitted the accused. The said order of acquittal does not call for any interference by this Court. Hence, the criminal appeal is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. 10. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed confirming the judgment, dated 31.01.2005, in S.C.No.475 of 2003, on the file of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Kovur. _______________ (K.C. BHANU, J) Date: 14th September, 2009 KL