The evidentiary value of child witnesses in rape cases can establish conviction if their testimony is credible; penalties must reflect the gravity of crimes against minors.

1. Heard Sri T.S. Rayulu, learned counsel representing Smt Kavitha Gottipati, for the petitioner revisionist and Sri S. Venkata Sai, learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent / State.

2. The criminal revision under S.397 and S.401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("Cr.P.C") has been filed challenging the judgment dated 22.03.2007, passed by the X Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC), Guntur at Narasaraopet, partly allowing the appeal of the petitioner in Crl.A.No.4 of 2005, maintaining the judgment dated 05.10.2004, convicting the petitioner for offence under S.376 read with 511 , IPC, but reducing the sentence of 5 years R.I as imposed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Gurazala in S.C.No.160 of 2004 to 4 years R.I and confirming the remaining portion of the sentence.

3. The Sub Inspector of Police, Piduguralla Police Station, filed the charge sheet against the petitioner - accused stating that on 29.12.2003 at about 12.00 noon when "the victim" along with P.Ws.3 to 5 went to the fields to collect plum fruits (Regu Pallu), the accused with evil intention to commit rape, took the victim towards the red gram field near Daggu Bhavi, threw her down removed Langa and tried to commit rape and when P.Ws.3 to 5 reached there, the accused threatened them with dire consequences. On hearing the hue and cry P.Ws.6 and 7 rushed to the spot, the accused fled away. The accused also slapped the victim, who returned home and informed the same to her mother (PW.8). The victim's father P.W.1, on returning home learnt about the incident and on 29.12.2003 at 9.00 p.m. lodged report to the Police Station.

4. The Sub Inspector of Police, Piduguralla registered case in Crime No.280 of 2003 under S.506, S.376 read with S.511, IPC, sent FIR to the Court and the officers concerned and made investigations.
He examined the witnesses, recorded their statements, inspected the scene of offence on 30.12.2003 at 10.00 a.m. in the presence of the mediators and also prepared rough sketch of the scene. The Investigation Officer (I.O) (PW.10) arrested the accused on 17.01.2004, produced him to the Court and obtained remand. After completion of the investigation the IO filed the charge sheet for the offence punishable under S.506, S.376 read with 511, IPC.

5. The I Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gurazala, took the case on file under S.506(2), S.376 r/w 511, IPC against the accused and after complying with the formalities committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Guntur, who made it over to the Court of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Gurazala.

6. In trial, P.Ws.1 to 10 were examined and Exs.P.1 to P.4 were marked for the defence. After closing the prosecution case, the accused was examined under S.313 Cr.P.C. He did not offer any defence.

7. The learned trial Court convicted the accused for the offence under S.376 r/w S.511, IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for five years and pay fine of Rs.1,000/-. In default to undergo Simple Imprisonment SI for two months.

8. The appeal filed by the revisionst - accused was partly allowed in the terms already mentioned above against which this revision has been filed.

9. Sri T.S. Rayulu, learned counsel for revisionst submitted that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The conviction has been based on the testimony of child witnesses which are most u