Ratiram vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Bharat Bhushan, J.—Learned A.G.A. has accepted notice on behalf of State.

Heard Sri Hanuman Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for appellant and learned A.G.A. for State.

Appellant, Ratiram/informant seeks leave to file a criminal appeal against the judgment and order dated 22.2.2014 passed in Special Sessions Trial No. 18 of 2008 (State Vs. Shafiq and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 500 C of 2006 under Sections 323/34, 504, 506 and 3(i)(X) SC/ST Act, P.S. Maudarwaja, district Farrukhabad whereby respondents no. 2 to 5, namely, Shafiq, Mushtakeem, Bhure and Niyaz Ahmad were acquitted.

Learned counsel for appellant submits that trial court has not applied its mind and that; acquittal of respondents on the basis of non existence evidence by trial court is faulty and is not in consonance with the available evidence on record.

The judgment of trial court reveals that several persons were arrayed as accused in the complaint but Investigator did not find sufficient evidence against Shamim, Razia, Shazia, Siba, Rani and Smt. Quresha. Two public witnesses of fact were produced but trial court has concluded that P.W.-1, informant, Rati Ram was in fact not the witness of event as admittedly he had gone out in connection with other work at the time of incident and came back only after the incident was over. Therefore, the only witness available on record is P.W. 2 injured, KM. Vimlesh. It is surprising that despite the presence of several witnesses including Ms. Ranno, Kallu @ Kalute and Mrs. Sudama, none of them were produced during the course of trial. The name of Kallu @ Kalute and Ms. Ranno have been mentioned in the initial report. Mrs. Sudama is mother of injured P.W.-2 Kumari Vimlesh and yet she did not enter the witness box and no explanation was provided for non production of these witnesses of fact. The testimony of injured witness reveals that incident occurred for almost half an hour wherein several persons brutally assaulted injured Km. Vimlesh yet merely four contusions were found on the persons of injured Km. Vimlesh. In the opinion of the trial court, the medical report was inconsistent with the ocular testimony. It is apparent that this conclusion of trial court is not off the mark.

The final report indicates ear rings and nose pin were snatched at the time of incident; this act must have left some trace of injuries on ear and nose but medical report does not indicate any injury either on the ear or nose. The prosecution has not explained the non production of other independent witnesses.

I have carefully examined all the material available on record. It is apparent that independent witnesses were not produced despite their presence. Medical report is totally inconsistent with the ocular testimony. Learned Judge also found that testimony of injured witnesses was not credible and this conclusion is logical and satisfactory. It cannot be called farfetched or perverse. Leave to appeal is therefore, declined and the application for the same is rejected.

In view of the order passed today on criminal leave to appeal application, the criminal appeal against the order dated 22.2.2014 passed in Special Sessions Trial No. 18 of 2008 arising out of Crime No. 500 C of 2006 under Sections 323/34, 504, 506 and 3(i)(X) SC/ST Act, P.S. Maudarwaja, district Farrukhabad is also dismissed.

For details, see order of date passed on separate sheets.