NARAVA SIVA PRASAD Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Narava Siva Prasad @ Siva preferred the present criminal appeal, aggrieved by the judgment made by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam, dated 13-11 -1998 in Sessions Case No. 24 of 1998, finding him guilty for an offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code (for brevity 'IPC') and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for fifteen days.

(2.) Smt. N. Anjana Devi Satyanarayana, the counsel representing the appellant would submit that there is absolutely no corroboration to the evidence of P.W. 1 and P.W. 6 is a chance witness. It is highly doubtful whether P.W. 6 was present at all especially in the light of the admissions made by P.W. 1 and hence, the whole evidence available on record is shaky, unbelievable and hence, the accused is entitled for an acquittal. The learned counsel also would submit that the learned Judge having convicted the accused under Sec. 324 IPC had imposed a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for fifteen days, which is definitely highly excessive. Learned counsel also would contend that in view of the enmity, the possibility of foisting the case against the accused, also cannot be totally ruled out and on that ground also the accused is entitled for benefit of doubt. In the alternative, the learned counsel would submit that even otherwise it is a fit matter, where the benefit of the probation of offenders Act could have been given to the appellant-accused. The learned counsel placed reliance on certain decisions to substantiate her contention.

(3.) Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would contend that the evidence available on record is clear and convincing and there can be no doubt about the happening of the incident. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor also had taken this Court through the evidence available on record and the findings recorded and would contend that in the facts and circumstances, the conviction and sentence are well justified.