BURLA VENUGOPALAKRISHNA Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant/a-2 aggrieved by the conviction under Section 376 (2) (g), I. P. C. and sentencing him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for one year, imposed in S. C. No. 83/2001 on the file of Sessions Judge-cum-Mahila Court, Vijayawada, had preferred the present Criminal Appeal.

(2.) IT is brought to the notice of the Court that A-3 died and hence the case stood abated as against A-3. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that A-1 did not prefer any Appeal.

(3.) SRI Srirama Krishna, the learned counsel provided by Legal Aid to the appellant/a-2 would contend that except the evidence of P. W.-1 there is no other evidence available on record and the medical evidence also is doubtful about the commission of the offence of rape. The learned counsel also had pointed out several infirmities in the medical evidence and the improbability in the version of PW-1. The learned counsel also had taken this Court through the evidence of DW1 and DW-2 and had commented that only on strong suspicion the appellant/a-2 was implicated in the present case.