Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 1015 (MP)

State of M. P. v. Surendra Singh

2014-08-13

B.D.RATHI

body2014
JUDGMENT 1.Heard on I.A. No. 8408 of 2011, an application for Condonation of delay in filing the petition for leave to appeal. Considering the reasons mentioned in the application, it is hereby allowed. The delay in preferring the petition stands condoned. Also heard on the question of admission. 2. On behalf of the petitioner/State, this petition has been preferred under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of leave to file an appeal against the acquittal of the respondent/accused from the offence punishable section 354 or in alternative under section 323 of I.P.C. and section 3(1)(xi) of the SC & ST Act, vide impugned judgment dated 8/4/11 passed in S.S.T. No. 37 of 2009 by the Special Judge (Atrocities), Vidisha (M.P.). 3. Having regard to the arguments put forth on behalf of the petitioner-State, the entire case has been perused. 4. The learned trial court after considering the evidence of the prosecutrix (PW-1) vis-a-vis other witnesses namely, Rambai (PW-3), Vinita (PW-4) and Nirmal (PW-7) finds that there are material contradictions and omissions among the statement of the witnesses. The evidence of complainant/prosecutrix was not corroborated by the witnesses aforesaid. Even in the evidence, Dr. Atul Jain (PW-8) opined that the injuries do not corelate to the timing of the incident. After thus considering the evidence on record and for want of cogent and reliable evidence, it is concluded by the trial court that the prosecution failed to bring home the alleged offence against the respondent. 5. After perusing the impugned judgment, this court also finds that no error has been committed by the trial court which may lead to draw adverse inference against the findings so recorded. That apart, it is well settled that in acquittal cases, interference is warranted only when it is found that the reasons given by the trial court for acquittal are palpably wrong, manifestly erroneous, perverse or demonstrably unsustainable. Consequently, for want of substance in the petition same is hereby dismissed.