A RAMU Vs. RAMASWAMYS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The victim girl aged about 35 years by name Ramu daughter of one Arunachala founder of Pothireddipatti village in Sattar Taluk, the complainant and examined as P.W. 1 before the trial Court has filed this revision under Section 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the legality and propriety of the judgment of acquittal rendered by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ramanathapuram at Madurai in Crl. R.P. No. 24 of 1988, acquitting both the respondents/accused of the offence under Section 354, I.P.C. and setting aside the conviction and sentence of imprisonment for a period of six months and the fine amount of Rs. 500/- each to be refunded, which was imposed by the learned Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Sattar in C.C. 101 of 1987 and confirmed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Srivilliputhur in C.A. 44 of 1988.

(2.) Brief facts of the prosecution case as culled out from the recorded evidence are stated as follows : The revision petitioner being a coolie was waiting in the bus stop to go to her village Pothireddipatti after finishing her day's coolie work at about 9.30 p.m. on 4-2-1987 along with other coolies. The last bus having accommodated the other coolies but however left the revision petitioner alone for want of accommodation. She happended to remain in the bus-stop and both the respondents/accused came there in two bi-cycles and approached the petitioner to give a lift to reach her village and that accordingly, they came near the junction of Kollampatti pirvivu. On being asked to get down and go to her village, the petitioner got down and was proceeding. At that point of time, while she was being followed by the respondents to agree for sexual intercourse, she tried to run away. But however, both the respondents overpowered her and took her to a nearby pit and put her down and whereupon the first respondent attempted to commit rape and the petitioner fought and never budged for chem. By raising hue and cry and by overpowering the respondents, she managed to escape from both the respondents and reached her village. She informed her sister and uncle about the occurrence at about 12 mid-night. Since there were no bus-facilities, the petitioner along with her uncle reached the match factory on the next day morning and informed their employees and on their instructions, the petitioner lodged Ex. P. 1 to the Police and produced the torn jacket M.O. 1. On receipt of the complaint Ex. P.1, P.W. 3 registered the same in Sathur Police Station Crime No. 93 of 1987 against the respondents under Section 354, I.P.C. and sent P.W. 1 for medical examination. P.W. 2 Dr. Smt. Ulagammal examined P.W. 1 and issued Ex. P2, the copy of the Accident Register. As per Ex. P.2 though the doctor has noted down that P.W. 1 was alleged to have been beaten with hands by two known persons at 11 p.m. on 4-2-1987 at Kollampatti road, no external injuries were found but the patient had complained of pain in the chest. P.W. 3, the Sub Inspector of Police on receipt of Ex. P. 1, had been to the scene of crime, prepared the rough sketch Ex. P. 3, examined further witnesses, completed the investigation and laid final report against the respondents for the offence punishable under Section 354, I.P.C. in the trial Court.

(3.) On being examined by the trial court under Section 313, Cr. P.C. on the basis of the incriminating circumstances appearing against the respondents in evidence, they pleaded total ignorance and not guilty but however, they did not choose to examine witnesses on their side.