State of M.P. vs Ramesh and Another

Brij Kishore Dube, J.—Heard on the question of admission and perused the record. Against the judgment of acquittal dated 05/09/2011 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Aron, District Guna in Criminal Case No. 44/2006 (State of M.P., Vs. Ramesh and another) acquitting the respondents herein/accused from the charge under Sections 323/34, 341 and 506-B of IPC, the petitioner herein/State has preferred this application u/s 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of leave to file appeal.

The legality and propriety of the impugned judgment has been challenged on the ground of misappreciation of the evidence on record.

The learned Trial Court after appreciating and marshalling the evidence in detail ultimately in the impugned judgment found that the offence charged against the respondents has not been found proved on account of non-availability of the cogent evidence on record.

I have carefully gone through the reasons assigned by the learned Trial Court and found that the learned Trial Court has rightly arrived at a conclusion that the charge levelled against the respondents is not proved and, eventually, acquitted them.

I do not want to deviate from the view taken by the learned Trial Court because the learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point out any perversity and illegality in the impugned judgment.

Looking to the reasoned judgment passed by the learned Trial Court, acquitting the respondents, even if another view is possible on the same set of evidence, no ground is made out warranting admission of this application for grant of leave to appeal (Referred to Hallu and Others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, . Therefore, this application for leave to file appeal is dismissed.

Certified copy as per rules.