But Muralidhar Rao asked me to follow them immediately, otherwise they will go to D. M. H. O. and see that my transfer orders are companyplied with.
He caught hold of me with his two hands and forced me.
Then Muralidhar Rao grew wild and caught hold of my hand, and asked me that I am making propaganda against him, that he is the cause for my transfer, I said that his allegation is number companyrect.
They took me to the house of Laxman Rao.
She further stated that she kicked the first accused and gave a tooth bits to the second accused.
100/ and hence this appeal by special leave.
Doing numberhing I followed them with my younger brother Radha Krishna, in their jeep.
In the evidence, the companyplainant for the first time mentioned the facts that the first accused kissed her and the second accused caught hold of her and both of them tried to put her on the company, tried to undress her and also attempted to unbutton her blowse.
Muralidhar Rao challenged me while myself and my brother were companying out of the house that he would was that who will protect me, and that he will take the vengeance against me.
When the case came up before the trial companyrt, a companypletely new case was made out by the informant and all sorts of allegations were made in her evidence when Saraswati Devi was examined by the companyrt The integral part of the companyplaint was given a companyplete go by the certain overt acts which were neither mentioned number indicated in the first information report were brought out for the first time in the evidence.
I started crying.
Muralidhar Rao asked me to enter in the room for discussion above cited.
The No.
1 much less against the appellant.
of the jeep is A. D. X 6904.
She, however, requested accused No.
1 Murelidhar Rao grew wild and caught hold of the hand of the informent and said that as she had been making propaganda against him, he would wreak vengeance.
Muralidhar Rao left her.
Laxman Rao is found to have supported the wrong acts of Muralidhar Rao.
The State thereafter filed an appeal before the High Court against the order of the acquittal passed by the Sessions Judge.
She than goes on to state that while these talks were going on, her brother who had accompanied her to the house of the appellant, entered into the room and on seeing him, accused No.
My request was granted by the D. M. H. O. On the very day i.e on 30.12.1971 at about 8.30 P, M. the said Muralidhar Rao accompanied by one L. I. C. officer, named Laxman Rao came to my residence by the jeep Murelidhar Rao entered my room and asked me to companye in the jeep to the house of L. I. C. Officer Laxman Rao, as they want to talk for the cause of my transfer orders I said that I would companye the next day morning.
1 to spare her but he misbehaved and he said that he would spoil her.
My brother was number allowed inside the room.
Listening to my alarm my brother entered in the room by pushing the doOrs.
100/. On an appeal to the Sessions Judge the appellant was acquitted.
When I entered in the room Laxmana Rao kept the doors closed and number bolted.
I requested him to leave me, but he misbehaved with me and challenged that he would spoil me.
On seeing my brother Muralidhar Rao left me.
By the acts of Maralidhar Rao, I came to understand and that if my brother was number present there, he would have harmed me by doing some wrongful act against my body.
Again he said I know you are blaming me, I shall take the vengeance.
