AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
State has laid this Criminal Leave to Appeal under Section
378(iii) & (i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to challenge
the acquittal of accused-respondent for offence under Sections
333 and 477 IPC, passed by Addl. Sessions Judge No.4, Bikaner
(for short, ''learned trial Court''), vide its judgment dated 21 st of
December, 2016.
Facts, in brief, giving rise to this Leave to Appeal are that
pursuant to a written report dated 10 th of February 2010, FIR
No.22/2010 was registered with Police Station Khajuwala, District
Bikaner against accused-respondent for offence punishable under
Sections 332, 353, 333, 149 and 477 IPC. Police after
investigation charged the accused-respondent for offence under
Sections 332, 353, 333 and 477 IPC. Thereafter, charges were
framed against the accused-respondent and upon denial of
charges, he was put on trial. The prosecution examined eleven
witnesses and also exhibited fifteen documents to substantiate its
case. After recording statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C., he
examined three witnesses in his defence.
The learned trial Court, upon appreciation of evidence,
recorded a definite finding that charges against accused-
respondent under Sections 333 & 477 IPC are not proved beyond
all reasonable doubts. While considering charges for offence
under Sections 332 and 353 IPC, the learned trial Court found that
the same are proved, but, taking into account the sentence
prescribed for these offences and the age of accused, who is
septuagenarian, the learned trial Court extended benefit of
probation to him.
It is also noteworthy that earlier in a criminal Leave to
Appeal No.904/2017, challenging the impugned verdict, precisely,
for the reason that the learned trial Court erroneously extended
the benefit of doubt, a Co-ordiante Bench of this Court, upon
consideration of the matter, did not find any infirmity in the
impugned judgment and consequently rejected the appeal on 19 th
of July 2017.
I have heard learned Public Prosecutor, perused the
impugned judgment and also scanned the entire record of the
case.
Upon examining the matter in its entirety and after perusal
of the impugned judgment as well as judgment passed by Co-
ordinate Bench in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.904/2017, in my
opinion, the learned trial Court has not committed any manifest
error in appreciation of evidence for acquitting the accused-
respondent of offence under Sections 333 and 477 IPC.
The learned trial Court has recorded a definite finding that
prosecution has not been able to prove both the charges beyond
reasonable doubt. The legal position is no more res-integra that
a verdict of acquittal is not liable to be interfered with by the
appellate court even if two views are possible and the appellate
Court is expected to subscribe the view, which favours the cause
of accused-person.
In totality, I am unable to find any perversity in the
impugned judgment in appreciation of evidence by the learned
trial Court, nor the same can be said to be not satisfying the test
of prudency.
In view of foregoing discussion, no case for grant of leave to
appeal is made out.
Consequently, leave is declined and the appeal is, hereby,
rejected.