Appeal under Section 372/374(2)/378(4) of Cr.P.C praying that the High Court may be pleased to to present this Memorandum of Criminal Appeal Against the order in SC.No.79 of 2005 on the file of the Hon'ble Assistant Sessions Judge, Tanuku, and prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to set aside the order of acquittal and convict the accused / (respondents) for the offence with which he was charged.

IA NO: 1 OF 2008(CRLAMP 1709 OF 2008

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to condone the delay of "549 days" days in presenting the appeal against the order of acquittal of the accused / respondents in SC.no.79 of 2005 on the file of the Hon'ble Assistant Sessions Judge, Tanuku, dated 19th day of October of 2006.

The Court made the following:

ORAL JUDGMENT:

The present criminal appeal is preferred by the appellant–State challenging the order of acquittal dated 19.10.2006 passed in S.C. No. 79 of 2005 on the file of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Tanuku. The learned Sessions Judge recorded an order of acquittal for the offences under Sections 366-A, 376, 419, 354, 448, 506(1), and 182 IPC framed against the accused, and acquitted him under Section 235(1) CrPC.

The case of the prosecution is that PW1 is the daughter of PW2. She was studying Intermediate in the year 2003.The accused is a relative of PW2. On 03.09.2003, as usual, PW1 went to the college located at Tanuku. The accused met her at about 9:00 a.m. and represented to PW1 that her maternal aunt wanted to see her. Believing his representation, PW1 accompanied the accused on his bicycle. The accused took PW1 to the house of PW6, A. Kanakalakshmi, who is the maternal aunt of the accused. PW1 and the accused stayed there for ten days, during which period the accused committed sexual assault on PW1 and threatened to kill her if she disclosed the same to anyone.

Thereafter, the accused shifted PW1 to the house of PW4, M. Padmavathi, at Masjidpeta, Tadepalligudem, where he kept her for another ten days and again committed sexual assault on her, while issuing similar threats. Subsequently, the accused took PW1 to the house of her maternal grandmother located at Darsiparru of Pentapadu Mandal. The accused informed her maternal grandmother that he had found PW1 on the way and therefore, brought her there. The maternal grandmother requested the accused to hand over PW1 to her parents.

Accordingly, they came to the railway station at Tanuku. The accused telephoned one Burra Nageswara Rao (LW4), introduced himself as Vinod, and asked LW4 to collect PW1 at the Tanuku railway station. He also threatened LW4 that he would kill PW1 if LW4 brought anyone along with him. Further, he warned PW1 not to disclose the incident to anyone, stating that otherwise he would write a letter to her would-be husband informing him of the events, thereby damaging her reputation in society. LW4 came to the railway station and took PW1 to her home on 23.09.2003.

The parents of PW1, i.e., PW2 (father), questioned PW1 about what had happened to her during those days. PW1 informed them that the accused had handed her over to one Vinod of Rajahmundry. However, no report was lodged with the police immediately. On 08.10.2003, the accused came to the house of PW1 and PW2 and demanded that PW1 accompany him. PW1 raised cries, and her parents attempted to catch the accused, but he managed to escape.

Thereafter, PW1 and PW2 went to the police station at about 8:00 p.m. on 09.10.2003 and submitted Ex.P1 report. The Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police (PW13) registered the same as Ex.P9 FIR and forwarded the original to the jurisdictional Magistrate, along with copies to the concerned officials. PW14, the Inspector of Police, on receipt of the FIR, took up the investigation. He examined PW1 and PW2, recorded their statements, and sent PW1 to the hospital for medical examinatio