In Ravi Sharma v. State

Chakali Yadaiah, S/o. Balaiah, Age 38 years, Caste Chakali, Occ. Dhobi, R/o H. No.6-66/2911, Srinivasa Colony, I\Iahabubnagar ...Accused / Respondent Counsel for the Appellant Sri M Vivekananda Reddy Assistant Public Prosecutor Counsel for the Respondent : Sri M Achuta Reddy The Court delivered the following Judgment : _-_==._=.F:4 { THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER cRTMTNAL APpEAL iti3ooz oF 2ol3 JUDGMENT: The State aggrieved by the acquittal of the respondent/ accused has filed the pre:sent appeal.

2. Heard Sr,. M.Vivekananda Reddy, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and Srr M.Achuta Reddy, learned couns;el for the respondent/ accused.

3. The case of the prosecution is that PW.2 is the viclim girl and PW. 1 is the rnother of the victim girl. According to PWs.1 and 2, they went to the police station on 10.O5.2008 and filed a written complaint stating that PW. 1 was residing in the hor.rse of her parents. PW 1 cleveloped intimacy with the accused about B years prior and the ac,:used also married her. The accused v,'as already married and a<;cused's wife and children were living separately, however, accuse<l Iived with PW. 1. Since 5 years, ttle accused started harassing PW. 1 for which reason, PWs.1 and 2 st,:rrted living separately from accused. The accused used to visit the house of PW. 1 frequently On 07.O5.2OO8, PW. 1 went to attend coolie work, leaving the victirn-PW.2 and another daughter in the house. On the 2 said day it is alleged that the accused raped PW.2 by gagging her mouth with cloth and also threat;;;A.1dki11 her, if she reveals the incident to anyone. The complaint was filed three days after the incident. The case was registered by the Inspector and the victim was sent for medical examination. The doctor-PW.8 examined the victim and stated in her chief-examination as follows: 'According to FSL report, Semen and Spermatozoa are not detected, blood not detected in the smear sent on glass slides for examination. Hence mg final opinion regarding the uictim girl, she did not undergo sexual intercourse. Ex.P8 is FSI report and Ex.P9 is final opinion. "

4. The learned Sessions Judge acquitted the accused mainly on the groiind that the entire case as narrated by PWs.1 and 2 before the Court below was a complete improvement from their earlier statement. Further, the medical evidence also did not support the case of PWs.1 and 2. A delay of 3 days in lodging the complaint was also not explained, and according to the witnesses they went on with their life normally for three days after the incident.

5. PW. 11-Investigating Officer admitted that: "It is true that PW.2 did ruot state before me that the accused remoued his clothes and her clothes and put his priuatet parl into her piuate part ond that he threoterued her and made lrcr to uash the bloods:lained cloth<ts."

6. Similarly, PW. 10-S.I of Police, Telkapally lP.S. irr his cross examination, stated as follows; "It.is true Uitat PW.l did not state in her 161 Cr.P.C, statement as uell as Ex.I'l that she utas informed bg her daughter that the accused, pltt his piuate part into her piiate part and after completion o,r the offence the acansed asked her daug itter to u.tosh her clothes."

7. It is admitled that PW. 1 and the accused rvere nort on cordial terms. They were fighting with each other in the backgrr:und of the differences in between them. According to the learnt:d Sessions Judge, a false c,c:nplaint was fiIed.

8. In Ravi Sharma v. State (Government of NCT of Delhi) and another', the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that whlle deal.ing with an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court has to consi,:ler whether the trial Court's; view can be termed as a possible: one, particularly when evidence on record has been analysed. The reason is that an order of acquitt;a1 adds up to the presumption of innocence. in favour I 120221 8 Supreme Court (lases 536 4 of the accused. Thus, the appellate court has to be relatively slow in reversing the order of the trial court refideiing acquittal

9. ln Ghureg La.l a. State of Uttar Pradesh,' the Hon'ble Supreme Court after referring to several Judgments regarding the settled principles of law and the powers of appellate Court in reversing the order of acquittal, held at para 70, as follows: "7O. In the light of the aboue, the High Court a.nd- other appellate Courts should follout the utell-settted pinciples crystallized bg number oJ Judgments if it is going to ouemtle or othentise disturb the tial court's acquittal:

1. The appellate court maA onlg ouemtle or othenttise disturb the tial court's acquittal if it has "uery substantial and compelling reasons" for doing so. A number of instances aise in uhich tlrc oppellate court uLould haue "uery substantial and compelling reasons" to discard the trial court's decision- 'Very substantial and compelling reasons" eist uhen: i) The tial court's concfusion u.tith regard to the facts is palpablg ii) The tial court's decision was based on an erroneous uiew of iii) The tnal court's judgment is likelg to result in "graue miscarriage u)rong: la u-t; of justice"; iu) The entire approach of the trial courl in dealing u.tith the euidence wos patentlg illegal; u) The tial court's judgment u)as mantfestlg unjust and unreasonable; ui) The triat court has ignored the euidence or misread the mateial euidence or hns ignored mateial documents like dging declarations/ report of tfrc ballistic Ex-Pert, etc. uii)This tist is intended to be illustratiue, not exhaustiue. 2. The appellate court must alutags giue proper ueight and consideration o the findings of the tial court. ' 12008; l0 Sup."me Court Cases 450 I I 5

3. If ttt,o reasonable uieu.ts can be reached one that leads to acquitta\ the other to conuiction _thg Hlgh Courts/ appetllate courts must rule in fauour of the accused. "

10. The entire case as narrated by the witnesses, is during the course of trial is a complete improvement from thr:ir earl:ier version There is absolut,ely no corroboration from the evidence of doctor, who examined the v.Lctim girl and the doctor specificalll' stated that there was no penetration, any kind of sexual assault and rape was ruled out.

11. There are no compelling reasons to interfere with rhe findings of the learned Sessions Judge, which are based on record

72. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal is dismissed. Sd/- B. SATYAVATHI REGISTRAR DEPUTY //TRUE COPYII 'i\ \. ./.J, The llAdditionirl District & Sessions Judge (FTC), Mahabubnagar. (with records, il' any) Two CCs to ther Public prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad [OLl! One CC to Sri l,/ Achuta Reddy, Advocate tOpUCl Two CD Copies; To 1 2 3 4 ON OFFICER @* I I HIGH COURT DATED:10102t2025 JUDGMENT CRLA.No.1002 of 2013 t- 1HE SI4 r) 2 4 [iAn i025 $( t llpnl r', ,.,/' DISMISSING THE CRLA ,{ a