- (1.)The assistant session judge found respondents-accused, five in number, guilty of offence under sections 376 (1) , 452, 506 and 143 of the Indian Penal Code. They were convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years each for the offence under section 376 (1) I. P. C. in addition to fine of Rs. 500/ - and in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months each. For offence under section 452 I. P. C. , sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment was imposed on them and for offence under sections 506 and 143 I. P. C. , fine of rs. 1000/- and Rs. 500. 00 respectively was imposed and in default, sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months.
(2.)Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence, an appeal was filed by the accused before the High Court. The high Court, on appreciation of evidence, by the impugned judgment allowed the appeal. The conviction and sentence awarded to the respondents was set aside. The State of Andhra Pradesh is in appeal against the judgment of acquittal.
(3.)Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has taken us through the evidence, in particular the evidence of the prosecutrix - P. W. I. The incident of rape had allegedly taken place on the intervening night of 4th and 5/07/1989. The first information report was lodged with the police station on 10/07/1989. The police station is about 4 kms. away from the place of occurrence. According to the version of the prosecution, at the time of occurrence two minor sons of p. W. I, who were examined as P. Ws 2 and 3 were sleeping in a separate cot in the same room where the offence is said to have taken place. Their ages at the time of occurrence were 10 years and 8 years respectively. According to the version of the prosecution, they did not raise any alarm or informed anyone on account of threat given to them and one of the accused having threatened them with a knife. There are houses close to the house in which P. W. I was staying at the time of the incident. The house is in the middle of the village as per the testimony of the investigating officer - P. W. 8. The reason for delay in lodging the report to the police is said to be the absence of the husband of P. W. 11 from the village. The husband was examined as P. W. 4. He is said to have gone out of the village to purchase buffaloes, being in the business of sale and purchase of buffaloes and after his return the report was lodged with the police after about 14 hours of his arrival. The doctor was examined as p. W. 6. According to P. W. 6, the external injuries were of about one week prior to the examination. Those injuries were in the nature of abrasions.