Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 81 (JHR)

Malti Devi v. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)

2007-02-12

D.P.SINGH

body2007
Judgment By Court.- This appeal arises out of order of acquittal dated 22.5.1999 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Godda in P.C.R. Case No. 428 of 1997/Tr. 233 of 1999 by which the learned trial court has acquitted the respondents from charges under Sections 147, 323 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that on 18th of August, 1997, complainant Malti Devi was getting her ancestral house cleaned situated in Mauza-Khatnai, when all the respondents objected, abused and assaulted her. The incident was seen by witnesses named in the complaint petition. The respondents have further taken away one silver chain from her possession. Then complaint was lodged and the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Godda took cognizance. Thereafter, trial was initiated after framing charge on 19.9.1998. The trial court after considering the evidence on record found and held that the prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubts the charges against the respondents. Accordingly, by order dated 22.5.1999 the respondents were acquitted. 3. The present appeal has been preferred mainly on the grounds that the learned trial court has not considered the evidence on record properly. It is also asserted that the witnesses have consistently supported the allegation, but the learned trial court discarded their evidence only on the grounds that they were related with the complainant. Therefore, the impugned order dated 22.5.1999 be set aside and the respondents convicted for the charges alleged against them. 4. The respondents were noticed and they appeared through their counsel. According to their defence, they were implicated falsely in this case because of previous enmity and dispute regarding the properties between the families. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the trial court did not believe on the consistent evidence merely on the grounds that they were related and there was previous enmity between their families. Mr. Uday Kant Thakur, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, stressed that in view of such consistent evidence on record, the charges have been proved beyond doubts. 6. I have gone through the lower court records to appreciate the submissions made on behalf of the appellant. It is apparent from the records that the place of occurrence situated in Mauza-Khatnai was being cleaned by complainant Malti Devi when all the respondents are alleged to have assaulted her and snatched her silver chain. 6. I have gone through the lower court records to appreciate the submissions made on behalf of the appellant. It is apparent from the records that the place of occurrence situated in Mauza-Khatnai was being cleaned by complainant Malti Devi when all the respondents are alleged to have assaulted her and snatched her silver chain. It is also apparent from the complaint petition itself that the parties were not on good terms and a proceeding under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure resulted in execution of bond. However, the incident is said to have been witnessed by the son, daughter and husband of the complainant. They have come to support the complainant during trial. According to P.W.1 Gopal Mahto, the son and P.W. 2 Mahendra Mahto, the husband, they have asserted that such an incident took place with the complainant Malti Devi (P.W 3). During cross-examination, P.W.1 Gopal Mahto admitted that the respondents were Gotiyas and two cases were earlier filed by his mother against them. He further admitted that there was family partition between his father and uncles and the place of occurrence was not in a living condition for last four-five years. P.W 2, the husband of the complainant, during cross-examination admitted that he could not say the month of occurrence. P.W 3, the complainant, during cross-examination admitted that the respondents were close agnates. She further admitted that she used to live with family members in different place at Bharti Kita as the residents have chased them away from the house situated at the place of occurrence. She further admitted that the house situated at the place of occurrence was not locked as it has already fallen. She admitted that she cannot say on which part of her body assault took place and she alongwith her family members returned to Bharti Kita. She further admitted vide paragraph-14 that all the criminal cases were filed by her against the respondents. P.W 4 Nageshwar Mandal admitted during cross-examination that he was a witness in other cases against the respondents filed on behalf of the complainant. He contradicted the complainant and her husband regarding in the room at the place of occurrence. 7. I have further gone through the impugned judgment and find that the learned lower court has discussed the evidence on record at length. He contradicted the complainant and her husband regarding in the room at the place of occurrence. 7. I have further gone through the impugned judgment and find that the learned lower court has discussed the evidence on record at length. I find no apparent irregularity or illegality in the impugned judgment calling for interference. 8. In the result, this appeal is found devoid of merit and stands dismissed, but without cost.