Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 376 (JHR)

Suman Singh v. State of Jharkhand

2018-02-14

APARESH KUMAR SINGH, RATNAKER BHENGRA

body2018
ORDER : Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AP.P. for the State on the prayer for condonation of delay of 30 days made through I.A. No. 8769 of 2017 in preferring the instant petition seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 13th July, 2017 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamshedpur in C/1 Case No. 691 of 2008/T.R. No. 575 of 2017, where under all the 7 accused persons/opposite party Nos. 2 to 8 have been acquitted of the charges under Sections 498-A, 504, 506, 109 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Upon consideration of the grounds urged in the present LA and upon hearing the counsel for the parties, the delay of 30 days in preferring the instant petition is condoned. 3. Accordingly, the instant I.A stands disposed of. Cr. M.P. (DB) No. 3136 of 2017 4. We have considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties on the merits of challenge and gone through the relevant materials on record including the impugned judgment. 5. As per the complainant's case, she was married on 10th June, 1997 and had left her in-laws house on 14th December, 2001. On 22nd February, 2008, she alleged that her daughter had gone to her grandfather's house for watching T.V., then the accused came there and assaulted her. According to her, she was tortured by her husband and treatment is going on. She further stated that she lived in her in-laws house but both the houses' location are different. Her daughter stated during examination that on 22nd February, 2008, when she had gone to her grandfather's house for watching T.V then the accused persons used abusive language for her mother, she informed her mother and thereafter her mother went with her at her grand~ father's house then the accused persons assaulted her mother. 6. Learned trial Court has analysed the material evidence adduced by the complainant and taken note of these important details. It has found contradiction in the statement of the complainant and his daughter, as on one hand C.W.I, mother alleged that the accused persons assaulted her when she had gone to the house of the accused persons, the daughter, in her statement, alleged that the accused persons came to her home and assaulted her mother-complainant. It has found contradiction in the statement of the complainant and his daughter, as on one hand C.W.I, mother alleged that the accused persons assaulted her when she had gone to the house of the accused persons, the daughter, in her statement, alleged that the accused persons came to her home and assaulted her mother-complainant. Learned trial Court also came to the opinion on the basis of the deposition of the complainant herself that she has peacefully separated since 14th December, 2001 and has been living separately from the accused persons in the in-law's house at different locations of the accused persons. The complainant's story was found to be doubtful. Though, she had alleged that she was under treatment, but no proof of any treatment or prescription has been filed by C.W.I. She had further stated that she filed a written complaint in local police station and to Superintendent of Police, but even after many direction and sufficient opportunity, she failed to file the same. In these. circumstances. iearned trial Court came to the conclusion that the complainant failcd to provehe allegation against the accused persons beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt. It was therefore not proper to hold the accused persons in those circumstances, all the 7 accused guilty. In those circumstances, all accused persons were acquitted of the charges. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has laboured to take us to the material evidence of the two complainant's witnesses to establish that ingredients of the offences were established. There was a definite case of assault on the complainant by the accused persons. 8. Learned A.P.P. for the State has, however, supported the impugned judgment. 9. Having considered the submission of the parties, we are of the view that the material evidence on record were not only contradictory but also failed to establish the necessary ingredients of the serious offences under Sections 498-A, 504, 506, 109 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. For abetment and criminal conspiracy against all the 7 accused persons, there are no specific evidences against the accused persons, who appear to be the members of in-law's family of the complainant. 10. In such circumstances, we do not find any merit in this application to grant leave to appeal. Accordingly, it is dismissed. Application dismissed.