ORDER :

On allegation of an offence against human body, State led the prosecution as against five accused for a charge under Section 324 read with 34 I.P.C. and by a judgment dated 28.07.2008 in C.C.No.395 of 2004 the learned Additional Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri found all the accused not guilty and acquitted them. State was content with the decision. However, the victim/Mr. S.Srinivasa Rao/PW.1 has come up in this revision under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. and assails the incorrectness of the judgment of the learned trial Court.

2. Respondent Nos.1 to 5 in this revision are the accused who were tried and acquitted by the learned trial Court. In this revision notices were sent to them and a learned counsel made appearance on their behalf. However, as during the subsequent days there was no representation on their behalf, this Court initiated process as against respondent Nos.1 to 5 once again and notices were served. However, none made appearance on their behalf.

3. Respondent No.6 in this revision is the State and is represented by learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor.

4. Learned counsel on both sides submitted oral arguments.

5. The point that arises for consideration is: