State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Lankapalli Venkateswarlu
EmailAppeal: Criminal Appeal No. 581 of 1996
Petitioner: State of Andhra Pradesh
Respondent: Lankapalli Venkateswarlu
Apeal: Criminal Appeal No. 581 of 1996
Judges: Dr. A.S. ANAND, CJI., R.C. LAHOTI & DORAISWAMY RAJU, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Mar 14, 2000
Head Note:
CRIMINAL LAW
Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 376 with Evidence Act, 1872 – Sections 3, 45 – Prosecu-trix, giving a go-bye to her version in FIR, while deposing in Court – Medical report also not supporting her allegations. Held that acquittal by High Court does not require any interference.(Paras 2, 3)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. The State is in appeal against an order of acquittal recorded by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh.
2. We have perused the evidence recorded by the trial court with the assistance of learned Counsel for the parties. Not only has the prosecutrix given a go-bye to the version, in material par-ticulars, as recorded in the FIR in her evidence recorded in Court, but even the medical evidence recorded by the Doctor – P.W. 12 does not at all support the allegations made by the prosecutrix.
3. In the face of the evidence on the record, the view expressed by the High Court cannot be said to be unreasonable, let alone perverse. The order of acquittal does not merit any interfer-ence. The appeal, therefore, fails and is dismissed. The Respondent is on bail. His bail bonds shall stand discharged.
1. The State is in appeal against an order of acquittal recorded by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh.
2. We have perused the evidence recorded by the trial court with the assistance of learned Counsel for the parties. Not only has the prosecutrix given a go-bye to the version, in material par-ticulars, as recorded in the FIR in her evidence recorded in Court, but even the medical evidence recorded by the Doctor – P.W. 12 does not at all support the allegations made by the prosecutrix.
3. In the face of the evidence on the record, the view expressed by the High Court cannot be said to be unreasonable, let alone perverse. The order of acquittal does not merit any interfer-ence. The appeal, therefore, fails and is dismissed. The Respondent is on bail. His bail bonds shall stand discharged.
