Full Judgment
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR JUDGMENT
D.B.CRIMINAL LEAVE TO APPEAL NO.146/2014 State of Rajasthan versus Ramesh Kumar & Anr.
DATE OF ORDER
:: 28.11.2014 PRESENT HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA Mr.J.Bhardwaj, Public Prosecutor ..BY THE COURT : This application as per provisions of Sub-Section (4) of Section 384 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is preferred to have leave to appeal the judgment dated 20.2.2014 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Sirohi acquitting the accused-respondents Ramesh Kumar and Dinesh Kumar from the charges pertaining to the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 and 460 I.P.C.The application is barred by limitation from 69 days.
No application is preferred to condone delay in filing the application.
Ignoring the delay with the consent of learned Public Prosecutor we have heard the application on merits.
The argument advanced by learned Public Prosecutor is that the trial court erred while not relying on the version given by the 2 eye-witnesses Shri Vagta Ram (PW-5) and Lasa Ram (PW-9).It is further submitted that at the instance of accused Dinesh Kumar a 'lathi' was recovered but the trial court failed to appreciate the effect of such recovery.
From perusal of the judgment impugned it reveals that the prosecution substantiated its case with the aid of the evidence adduced by four eye-witnesses, namely, Hema Ram, Smt.
Sammi, Vagta Ram and Lasa Ram.
Hema Ram and Smt.
Sami did not support the prosecution case and, therefore, they were declared hostile.
So far as Vagta Ram (PW-5) and Lasa Ram (PW-9) are concerned, the trial court after examining the statements given by these witnesses did not find them trustworthy, being having serous contradictions in their version of facts mentioned during the couRs.of investigation and during the couRs.of trial.
Suffice to mention that the eye-witnesses aforesaid stated that they witnessed the incident but admittedly the place of their presence is shown at a distance of about 5-7 Kms from the place of occurrence.
Similarly, the recovery of 'lathi' at the instance of accused Dinesh Kumar is also of no consequence as the case of the prosecution throughout was that he was having an iron-pipe with him.
In totality, we are convinced that no adequate material was available to arrive at a definite conclusion about the involvement of the accused-respondents in the crime in-question and, therefore, the trial court rightly recorded acquittal in the instant matter.
In 3 such circumstance we do not find any reason to grant leave as prayed for.
The leave application is dismissed accordingly.
(PRAKASH GUPTA).J.
(GOVIND MATHUR).J.
Sanjay