STATE OF A.P. Vs. BADUGU KUMARASWAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal is filed against the acquittal of the accused in Calendar Case No.324 of 2001 on the file of the Additional Munsif Magistrate, Kandukur.

(2.) THE parties are referred as arrayed in the lower Court.

(3.) THE learned Public Prosecutor contends that the reasons given by the Court below are not proper. Evidently, in this case, the incident was said to have happened on 01.09.2001 at about 9.30 P.M. PW.1 claims that he was said to have been treated by the doctor on 02.09.2001 at about 12.00 Noon. But, however, the complaint was lodged at 11.30 P.M., on 02.09.2001. It is not known as to whether PW.1 was taken to the hospital by the police or he himself has voluntarily gone to the police station. There is also no explanation for the delay in lodging the complaint. Further -more, the lower Court noticed that the evidence of the doctor clearly goes to show that on 02.09.2001 PW.1 was examined at 12.00 Noon and the age of the injuries is about 24 to 36 hours prior to the examination, consequently the lower Court has found that the injuries must have been caused, if any, prior to 12.00 Noon on 01.09.2001, and which destroy the prosecution case that the incident happened on 01.09.2001 at 9.30 P.M. Evidently, there are said to be some civil disputes and ill -feelings between both the parties. The evidence of PW.1 is not supported by any independent evidence and the medical evidence is also not corroborative and therefore, the lower Court has rightly extended the benefit of doubt to the accused and there are no compelling reasons to come to a different conclusion.