STATE Vs. S. SUBRAMANIAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent herein is the sole accused in S.C. No. 166 of 2006 on the file of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar. He stood charged for the offences under Sections 417, 420 and 376 IPC. The trial Court, by judgment dated 28.08.2008, acquitted the respondent. The State is aggrieved by the same. That is how the appellant / State has come up with this appeal.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution in brief is as follows;

(3.) THE learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the trial Court had given much weightage for the minor inconsistencies in the case of the prosecution so as to acquit the accused. According to him, the evidence of PW1 is very cogent and there are no reasons to reject her evidence. He would further submit that on certain aspects, the evidence of PW1 is corroborated by PWs.2, 3 and 5, and the medical evidence also duly corroborates. Thus, according to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the lower Court ought to have convicted the accused.