IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL APPEAL No.243 of 2010 Between: The Sate of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. ..... Appellant/Petitioner AND Guntapudi Guravaiah @ China Guravaiah ..... Accused/Respondent JUDGMENT: The Criminal Appeal, by the State under Section 378 (3) & (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “Cr.P.C.”), is directed against the judgment, dated 23-01-2009, in Sessions Case No.185 of 2007, on the file of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Gudur, whereunder and whereby the sole Accused was found not guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 452 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “I.P.C.”) and accordingly acquitted. 2. Brief facts, that are necessary for disposal of the present Criminal Appeal, may be stated as follows: On 06-08-2004 at about 6.30 p.m., in the absence of her husband PW-1 was cutting curry leaves to prepare food in the verandah of her house. In the mean time the accused trespassed into her house with a dishonest intention, caught hold of her hands and dragged into her house, closed her mouth, torn her blouse and outraged her modesty. On hearing her cries, neighbours came there to rescue PW-1 and on seeing the neighbours, accused ran away. After arrival of PW-2, PW-1 lodged a complaint under Ex.P- 1. The Police took up investigation and filed charge sheet. 3. When the charges under Sections 452 and 354 I.P.C., against accused were framed, read over and explained to him in Telugu, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 4. To substantiate the charges, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 and 2 and got marked Exs.P-1 to P-3. No evidence either oral or documentary was recorded on behalf of the accused. 5. The trial court after considering the evidence came to the conclusion that there is no evidence to show that the accused committed the offences punishable under Sections 452 and 354 of I.P.C., and accordingly, acquitted him. Challenging the same, the present Criminal Appeal is filed by the State. 6. Now the point for determination is whether the prosecution proved its case against the sole Accused of the offences punishable under Sections 452 and 354 of I.P.C., beyond all reasonable doubt and whether the judgment of the trial Court is correct, legal and proper? 7. Heard the learned counsel representing the accused, learned Public Prosecutor and perused the judgment. 8. Though it is the case of the prosecution that the accused criminally trespassed into the house of PW-1 and outraged her modesty, during the course of trial, PW-1 did not support the case of the prosecution. She deposed that she did not know the contents of Ex.P-1. As PW-1 was giving totally a different version and completely a go by to her earlier statement, she was declared hostile by the prosecution. Similarly her husband PW-2 was also declared as hostile by the prosecution and the statements of PWs.1 and 2 recorded by the Police during the course of investigation were marked. Nothing has been elicited in their evidence to show that the accused committed house trespass and committed an offence punishable under Section 354 of IPC against PW-1. Therefore, in these circumstances, the trial Court rightly acquitted the accused. There are no compelling or substantial reasons to interfere with the same. Hence, the Criminal Appeal is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. 9. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed at the state of admission confirming the judgment, dated 23-01-2009, in Sessions Case No.185 of 2007, on the file of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Gudur. ________________ K.C. BHANU, J February 08, 2010 PN THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL APPEAL No.243 of 2010 February 08, 2010