ORDER:

Assailing the judgment dated 13.12.2011 in Crl.A.No.93 of 2010 on the file of the Court of learned IV Additional Sessions Judge at Tirupati, confirming the conviction and sentence passed against the accused No.1 by the judgment dated 26.05.2010 in C.C.No.405 of 2006 on the file of the Court of learned III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Tirupati, for the offences under Section 420 r/w.120-B and 506 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”), the petitioner/accused No.1 filed the present criminal revision case under Section 397 r/w.401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

2. The revision case was admitted on 15.11.2011 and the sentence of imprisonment imposed against the petitioner was suspended, vide orders in Crl.R.C.M.P.No.3741 of 2011.

3. The shorn of prosecution case is that:

i). Accused Nos.1 to 4 being family members-maintained chits since 2003 saying that they are having authorization and registration for running the chits. On believing the same, P.W.1 and others joined in said chits, in the month of May 2003, put one lakh rupees chits and paid Rs.4,000/- per month. P.W.1 paid twenty months chit amount to accused No.1 promptly and had bid Rs.30,000/- for the amount of one lakh rupees. Then, they informed her that if she executed an empty promissory note to them, they would only clear the chit amount. On that, P.W.1 gave an empty promissory note to accused No.1 in the presence of accused Nos.2 to 5. But, accused Nos.1 to 5 with an intention to cheat her did not give the chit amount and also threatened to see her end if she again asked the chit amount. Thereafter, P.W.1 and others, who are also facing same problem with the accused, joined together and gave a report to police.

v). Basing on Ex.P.1 report, P.W.10-S.I. of Police, West Police Station, Tirupati registered a case in Cr.No.51 of 2006 under Sections 420, 506 and 120-B of IPC and investigated into.

4. After completion of investigation, P.W.10 laid charge sheet and the same was numbered as C.C.No.405 of 2006 on the file of the Court of learned III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Tirupati, after full-fledged trial, found the accused Nos.1 to 4 guilty of the offences under Section 420 r/w.120-B and 506 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment of one year each and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default to suffer simple imprisonment of two (2) months each and also sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of one year each, for the respective offences. However, accused No.5 found not guilty of the offences under Section 420 r/w.120-B and 506 of IPC.

5. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner/accused No.1 along with accused Nos.2 to 4 preferred an appeal, vide Crl.A.No.93 of

2010, before the Court of learned IV Additional Sessions Judge at Tirupati and the same was dismissed in respect of accused No.1, vide judgment dated 13.12.2011, by confirming the conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court against her, however, allowed the said appeal in respect of accused Nos.2 to 4 by setting aside the conviction and sentence passed against them.

6. Against the said judgment of the first Appellate Court, the present criminal revision case was preferred by the petitioner/accused No.1.

7. Heard Sri K.Mahadeva, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.1 and Sri S.Dheera Kanishk, learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

8. Now the point that arises for determination in this revision is “whether there is any manifest error of law or flagrant miscarriage of justice in the findings recorded by the Trial Court as well first Appellate Court?”

9. Sri K.Mahadeva, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.1 submits that prosecution failed to establish that accused No.1 running the chit business and collecting money from P.Ws.1 to 8; that except the oral testimony, no documents in support of the prosecution version that accused collected money and when they became highest bidder, accuse