A RAMANAMMA Vs. NAKKA NEELAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the acquittal order passed by the Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class Pakala, in C. C. No. 11 of 1999 dated 31-1-2000.

(2.) The facts that arise for consideration can be briefly stated as follows: Respondents 1 to 3 are the accused. The incident alleged to have taken place on 14-12-1998 at about 7.00 p.m. when A Ramanamma, was proceeding infront of the house of A Narasimhulu, the 1st respondent herein picked up a row and caught hold of her tuft and beat her and assaulted her with hands on her back and caused pains. A-2 also rushed there and assaulted her with a stout stick and caused bleeding injuries on her head, and A-3 assaulted her with hands on her back and caused pains. The respondents 1 to 3 were chargesheeted for the offence under S. 324 r/w 34 IPC and 323 r/w 34 IPC. After trial, the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused on the ground that there are civil disputes pending against the parties and also non-examination of other witnesses is fatal to the prosecution case. Aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Magistrate, the defacto-complainant being P.W. 1 has preferred this revision.

(3.) It is mainly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the findings arrived at by the Court below are perverse and the evidence of P.W. 2 has not been properly appreciated by the lower Court. It is further contended that the evidence of P.W. 2 is corroborated by the evidence of P.W. 1 and therefore, the evidence of P.W. 2 cannot be discarded. The learned Public Prosecutor contends that there is no need to interfere with the judgment of the lower Court as it has rightly appreciated the evidence and come to correct conclusion.