DHANNULA GOVINDARAJU Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner herein was convicted by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Amalapuram, East Godavari District, in SC No. 213 of 1998 for the offence under Sec. 354 of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months. THE said judgment dated 19.6.2000 was questioned by the petitioner by filing Criminal Appeal No.237 of 2000 and the learned V Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), West Godavari, Rajahmundry, by his judgment dated 3.2.2003, while concurring with the findings recorded by the trial court, had dismissed the appeal. Hence, the petitioner approached this court by filing the present Criminal Revision Case invoking jurisdiction of this court under Sec. 397 and 401 of Cr. P. C.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution in brief is that there are disputes between the families of the petitioner and the parents of PW-1 who is the victim herein and a married woman. Previously, the younger sister of PW-1 was kidnapped and the petitioner herein and others were arrested in connection with the said crime, registered as to girl missing, and the said case is pending trial. While so, on 18.1.1998, PW-1 came to her parents house at D.Ravulapalem on the eve of Sankranthi festival and along with her friends, distributed sweets in all the houses except the house of the petitioner and as such the petitioner herein abused PW-1 and there ensued heated exchange of words. In that temper, the petitioner is said to have warned PW-1 that he would do the same thing as to what he did to her youngest sister. Saying so, he caught hold of the tuft of hair of PW-1 and dragged her into his house and on her raising cries, PWs 2, 4 and others went to the spot. THEreafter, PW-1 was brought to the police station by her father, where a complaint was lodged. It is further stated that a counter case in Cr. No.10 of 1998 for the offence under Sec. 506, 509 and 324 read with Sec. 34 IPC was registered against some of the witnesses for having beat the petitioner, his mother and sister when they intervened to rescue the petitioner herein.

(3.) PER contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the said submissions and contends that the courts below have rightly concluded that the petitioner is guilty of the offence under Sec. 354 IPC and it is not a case for interference.