THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY Crl.Rc.No.779 of 2004 JUDGMENT: This revision is filed under Section 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. against judgment made in Crl.A.No.26 of 1999 dated 6.6.2003 on the file of Principal Sessions Judge, West Godavari Division at Eluru confirming conviction and sentence imposed in S.C.No.247 of 1996 dated 1.2.1999 on the file of Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Eluru whereunder the accused was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 376(1) I.P.C. and in default of payment of the fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for two months. The prosecution case is as follows: On 9.3.1996 at about 5.00 p.m. when the defacto complainant-P.W.1 was returning home from their field along with her younger sister (P.W.2) carrying grass bundles on their head, at Pedacheruvu, the accused came behind them and pushed the grass bundle on her head down and pulled her into a nearby field and committed rape on her. P.W.2 went to her house and informed the same to her father (P.W.3) and others. On seeing P.Ws.3 to 5, the accused ran away from the scene of offence. A report was lodged with the concerned police on the basis of which the case was registered in Crime No.21 of 1996 under Section 376(1) I.P.C. on the file of Eluru Rural Circle Police Station and after necessary investigation, charge sheet was filed before the trial Court. For the prosecution, the victim was examined P.W.1 besides examining P.Ws.2 to 10 and Exs.P1 to P11 were marked. For the defence, none were examined and no documents were marked. The trial Court, after a detailed consideration of the matter, held that the accused committed rape on P.W.1 and therefore he was found guilty of committing the offence punishable under Section 376(1) I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for two months, whereas aggrieved by the same, the accused preferred Crl.A.No.26 of 1999 before the Principal Sessions Judge, Eluru and the appellate Court after due consideration of the matter, dismissed the appeal confirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court. There is no representation on behalf of revision petitioner. I have gone through the record. It is the claim of the revision petitioner in the memorandum of grounds that the evidence of P.W.1 is not supported by medical evidence. A perusal of the evidence of P.W.7-Doctor who examined P.W.1 would make it clear that on the basis of physical examination and chemical analysis, he found evidence of intercourse as semen was detected on the cloth piece of underskirt of P.W.1 and cotton swabs taken from her cervical canal and that intercourse would have occurred between 24 and 48 hours prior to the examination and Ex.P6 is the wound certificate, according to which, small abrasion like a nail mark found on the left side of the back shoulder blade measuring 1/4th inch. In view of the same, it cannot be said that the evidence of P.W.1 does not tally with medical evidence. I am of the opinion that the Courts below on proper appreciation of the matter, including the evidence adduced upheld the prosecution version and accordingly ordered conviction and sentence. I find no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings of the Courts below. With regards to question of sentence, the minimum sentence prescribed for ‘rape’ under Section 376(1) is seven years and since already the accused was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for seven years, there is no question of interfering with the same. For the foregoing reasons, the revision is liable to be dismissed and accordingly dismissed. _________________________ G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY, J Date: 1.7.2011 DA THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY Crl.Rc.No.779 of 2004 1.7.2011