Full Judgment
M.Cr.C.No.3087/2012 30.9.13 Per B.D.Rathi,J Shri Yogesh Dhande, Government Advocate for the applicant-State.
Heard on admission.
This application for grant of leave to appeal has been preferred under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as “the Code”) being aggrieved with the judgment dated 11/10/2011 passed by II Additional Judge to the Court of I Additional Sessions Judge, Khandwa, in Sessions Trial No.141/2007, whereby respondent Pannalal has been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 294, 506, 148, 307/149, 307 and 323/149 of the Indian Penal Code (“IPC” for short).Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 30/3/2007 at about 4 p.m., respondent along with co-accused Babulal, Vijay, Dilip and Shiv, being armed with deadly wepons viz.
Sword and Lathi, constituted an un-lawful assembly and in furtherance of its common object, not only filthily abused the complainant and her family membeRs.but also attempted murder of Rajesh by inflicting him injuries with Lathis and Sword, as well as, threw chili powder in the eyes of complainant Nirmalabai, Jugarbai and Nandlal and also beat the complainant with kicks and fists.
Learned Government Advocate submitted that the trial Court had not properly appreciated the evidence on record and the judgment of acquittal deserved to be interfered with.
Having regard to the arguments advanced by learned Government Advocate, we have perused the impugned judgment.
After taking into consideration the evidence of Rajesh (PW7).Nandlal (PW8).Nirmala Bai (PW9).Chhayabai (PW11) and Mukesh (PW13) trial Court found that prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, as their evidence was full with contradictions, omissions and exaggerations and also contrary to each other.
We agree with the findings recorded by the trial Court.
It is well settled that the judgment of acquittal should not be disturbed unless the conclusions drawn on the basis of evidence brought on record are found to be grossly unreasonable or manifestly perveRs.or palpably unsustainable.
Taking into consideration the reasons assigned on the face of evidence on record establishing the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the view taken by the learned trial Court was apparently a possible view.
As such, no interference is called for with the judgment of acquittal in question.
The application, being devoid of merit and substance, stands dismissed.
(AJIT SINGH) (B.D.RATHI) JUDGE JUDGE (and)