MANNAVA VENKATESWARLU Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these cases arise out of common judgment in Sessions Case No. 539 of 1984 on the file of the Court of Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Guntur. Prosecution was launched against one Mannava Venkateswarlu (hereinafter referred to as " the accused"). He wa``s charged with the commission of offence of rape punishable under Section 376 I.P.C. The accused pleaded innocence and not guilty and pleaded that he was implicated to wreck vengeance as there was strained relations inter se his father and PW 7 i.e. the fatherin-law of the victim. On appraisal of evidence, the court below has recorded conviction against the accused under Section 376 IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous Imprisonment for two (2) years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default, to undergo simple Imprisonment for six months.

(2.) The accused filed appeal in the court of Sessions, Guntur and before that, the State had filed appeal for enhancement of sentence on the ground that minimum mandatory sentence ought to have been imposed and the reasons recorded for imposing lesser sentence are irrelevant. The victim has also filed a revision for enhancement of sentence. The Criminal Appeal filed before the Court of Sessions, Guntur by the accused has been transferred to this court and all the matters have been heard by me and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(3.) Mr. T. Dasaradha Ramaiah, the learned counsel for the accused, vehemently contends that the charge of commission of offence is false and has been invented only to see that the accused is sent to Jail and that there is a strong motive for the implication of the accused, as there Is enmity inter father and P.W. 7 i.e., father-in-law of the victim, and that the victim has been used as a tool to lodge the complaint and implicate the accused falsely and that the prosecution Is full of contradictions and improbabaities and the victim's uncorroborated statement cannot be believed.