The appellate court upheld the acquittal, emphasizing that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, highlighting the presumption of innocence.

JUDGMENT :

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI)

The present appeal has been filed by the appellant/original informant under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) against the judgment of acquittal dated 09.09.2024 rendered by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-I, Sherghati, Gaya in Sessions Trial No.138/2022/950/2023, arising out of Gurua P.S. Case No.178/2020, whereby the respondents-accused have been acquitted by the learned Trial Court.

2. Heard Mr. Mahendra Thakur, learned Advocate for the appellant-informant and Mr. Satya Narayan Prasad, learned APP for the Respondent-State.

3. Mr. Mahendra Thakur, learned Advocate for the appellant-informant would mainly submit that the FIR being Gurua P.S. Case No.178/2020 was registered under Sections 341/323/302/504/34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as under Sections 3/4 of the Prevention of Witch Practices Act against the present respondents-accused. It has been mainly alleged by the informant in the FIR that on 03.08.2020, at about 04:15 p.m., her daughter Nirmala Kumar was returning from a Devi temple after offering her prayer. Pratima Kumari of her village started abusing her daughter. When her daughter forbade Pratima Kumari to do so, she caught hold of her hair and pulled her down. Till then, Arjun Choudhary, Akhilesh Choudhary and Phulesh Devi came and started assaulting her daughter. When the informant and her husband came there after hearing the alarm, Phulesh Devi caught her, pulled her down and started assaulting her on her breast by leg and assaulted her on her ear by means of iron rod due to which the ear of the informant was torn and started bleeding. Arjun Choudhary and his son Akhilesh Choudhary assaulted her husband on his head by means of iron rod due to which her husband fell down there and started vomiting blood and became unconscious. Thereafter the accused persons fled away from there. The local people gathered there after hearing alarm and brought her husband to Gaya Hospital from where he was referred to Blue Diamond Hospital, Patna where her husband died during the course of treatment.

4. Learned Advocate for the appellant-informant thereafter submits that after registration of the FIR, the Investigating Officer carried out the investigation and during the course of investigation, he had recorded statements of witnesses and collected the relevant evidence and thereafter filed charge- sheet against the respondents-accused. As the case was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the concerned Magistrate committed the same to the concerned Sessions Court.

5. Mr. Thakur, further submits that before the Trial Court, the prosecution had examined eight witnesses and also produced documentary evidence. Further statement of the accused-persons came to be recorded under Section 313 of the Code. After conclusion of the trial, the Trial Court passed the impugned judgment of acquittal whereby all the respondents- accused have been acquitted. The appellant-informant has, therefore, preferred the present appeal.

6. Learned Advocate for the appellant-informant has mainly contended that there are two injured eye-witnesses to the incident in question and they have fully supported the case of the prosecution. It is further submitted that the doctor, PW-8, who had conducted the post mortem on the dead body of the deceased, has also supported the version given by the eye- witnesses. Thus, prosecution has