IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1338 OF 2009 Between: The Sate of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. ..... Appellant/Petitioner AND Mode Ravi & 31 others ..... 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 19.07.2007, in S.C.No.129 of 2006, on the file of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Gudur, whereunder and whereby, A1 to A3, A5, A6, A8 and A10 to A32 were found not guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 143, 188, 448, 353, 341 and 427 read with 149 IPC and 136 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (for short, ‘R.P. Act’). 2. Brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the present criminal appeal may be stated as follows: During III Phase of Gram Panchayat Elections held on 20.08.2001, by the Chilamanuru Village Gram Panchayat, all the accused, under the leadership of A1 and A2, trespassed into the counting hall and demanded re-polling and re-counting. They over powered the duty polling and police officials present there and assaulted them physically. Hence, the police registered a case and filed charge sheet. 3. When the charges for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 188, 448, 353, 341 and 427 read with 149 IPC and 136 of the R.P. Act 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 levelled against the accused, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 7 and got marked Exs.P1 to P5. 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 A1 to A3, A5, A6, A8 and A10 to A32 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 143, 188, 448, 353, 341 and 427 read with 149 IPC and 136 of the R.P. Act and whether the judgment of the trial Court is correct, legal and proper? 8. Heard. 9. The Gram Panchayat Elections-2001 were held in Balayapalli Mandal during the III Phase of the elections, dated 20.08.2001. P.W.1, who is working as a teacher in Zilla Parishad High School, Thimmayapalem village, Dakkili Mandal, was deputed as the Election Officer at Chilamanuru village, Balayapalli Mandal. He deposed that at the time of declaration of winning candidate, a group of persons including women attacked them and demanded for recounting of votes. Admittedly, P.W.1 had no knowledge about any one of the accused because he belonged to a different village. Though he stated names some of the accused in the First Information Report, but he admitted that he wrote the names of the accused as furnished by the Village Administrative Officer of Chilamanuru village. P.W.2, who is the Village Administrative Officer of Chilamanuru Village, did not support the case of the prosecution. Similarly, P.Ws.3 to 6, who are the A.R. Constables, deputed on bandobasth duty, also did not identify any one of the accused as the persons trespassed into the counting place and caused mischief or obstructed the public servants in discharge of their official duties. 10. The evidence of P.W.6, who is another employee deputed on election duty as Polling Officer, would go to show that a mob consisting of 100 in number destroyed the ballet papers. He did not identify any one of the accused as the persons who were present along with the mob. P.W.7 was the Sub-Inspector of Police admittedly came to the spot one hour after the incident. He registered the case and prepared the observation report. 11. As none of the prosecution witnesses identified any one of the accused as the assailants, the trial Court rightly acquitted A1 to A3, A5, A6, A8 and A10 to A32. That order of acquittal does not suffer from any infirmities so as to call for interference by this Court. There are absolutely no compelling or substantial reasons to interfere with the same. Hence, the criminal appeal is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. 11. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed confirming the judgment, dated 19.07.2007, in S.C.No.129 of 2006, on the file of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Gudur. _______________ (K.C. BHANU, J) Date: 11th September, 2009 KL