Back
2018 Supreme(Raj) 472
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
P.K. Lohra, J.
State of Rajasthan - Appellant
Vs.
Bharat Singh - Respondent
Criminal Leave To Appeal Nos. 252, 253 & 254 of 2017
Decided On : 04-04-2018
Advocate Appeared:
O.P. Rathi, Vineet Jain
Headnote:
Indian Panel Code - Sections 420, 406, 467, 471 and 120-B – Criminal Procedure Code - Sections 378 and 386 - Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes - Quashed and set aside facilitating – Acquittal – Evidence - Besides that while pointing out many loopholes in prosecution evidence and sans any wrongful loss to exchequer appellate Court set aside conviction of respondents by extending them benefit of doubt – Held, High Court has acted on certain legal and factual presumptions which cannot be sustained on basis of the record before us and principles of laws aforenoticed - Case of prosecution thus suffers from proven improbabilities infirmities contradictions and the statement of sole witness Police Officer is not reliable and worthy of credence - In view of forgoing discussion and law laid down by Supreme Court in my considered opinion appellate Court has not committed any manifest error of law and fact in reversing judgments – Appeal dismissed
P.K. Lohra, J.
State of Rajasthan has preferred these 16 Leave to Appeals being aggrieved by judgments of Special Judge, Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act) Cases, Pali (for short, 'learned Appellate Court'), whereby the judgments rendered in various criminal cases against accused-respondents by Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pali (for short, 'learned trial Court') were quashed and set aside facilitating acquittal of the respondents for offence under Sections 420, 406, 467, 471 and 120-B IPC.
2. At the threshold, upon conclusion of trial, learned trial Court indicted accused-respondents for the charged offences in all the cases and handed down sentences of different durations. Feeling aggrieved by the judgments of learned trial Court, accused-respondents preferred appeals before learned appellate Court and the learned appellate Court by the impugned judgments acquitted all of them for the charged offences by extending benefit of doubt. The requisite details about all Leave to Appeals are mentioned as under:-
S. No.
Leave to Appeal No.
Appeal No. & Date of Judgment
Amount involved Rs.
Charged offences U/Ss.
Period during which offences allegedly committed
1.
252/2017
13/2014
20993
420, 467, 471, 406 & 120B IPC
July 1995 to Dec.1995
2.
253/2017
23/2014
14284
420, 467, 471, 406 & 120B IPC
July 1997 to Sept.1997
3.
254/2017
19/2014
14782
420, 467, 471, 406 & 120B IPC
Year 1993
4.
255/2017
15/2014
10049
420, 467, 471, 406 & 120B IPC
Jan. 1994 to June 1994
5.
292/2017
11/2014
18089
420, 467, 471, 406 & 120B IPC
Jan. 1998 to March 1998
6.
294/2017
21/2014
14984
420, 467, 471, 406 & 120B IPC
Jan. 1995 to June 1995
7.
295/2017
18/2014
22267
420, 467, 471, 406 & 120B IPC
Sept. 1996 to Dec. 1996
8.
296/2017
20/2014
20086
420, 467, 471, 406 & 120B IPC
May 1996 to August 1996
9.
297/2017
12/2014
8089
420, 467, 471, 406 & 120B IPC
Oct. 1991 to May 1993
10.
298/2017
22/2014
9301
420, 467, 471, 406 & 120B IPC
Oct., 1998 to Dec. 1998
11.
299/2017
24/2014
23977
420, 467, 471, 406 & 120B IPC
Jan 1997 to March 1997
12.
300/2017
17/2014
16664
420, 467, 471, 406 & 120B IPC
April 1997 to June 1997
13.
301/2017
25/2014
16958
420, 467, 471, 406 & 120B IPC
Jan 1996 to April 1996
14.
302/2017
16/2014
28046
420, 467, 471, 406 & 120B IPC
Oct. 1997 to Dec. 1997
15.
303/2017
14/2014
11543
420, 467, 471, 406 & 120B IPC
July 1998 to Sept. 1998
16.
304/2017
10/2014
13872
420, 467, 471, 406 & 120B IPC
Jan. 1999 to March 1999
3. The facts, in general, are identical in all these Leave to Appeals, including the charged offences and accused persons named therein are common but for timings of the commission of alleged offences by them. That apart, prosecution evidence in all the cases is also common to substantiate charges against accused-respondents. Therefore, the facts relevant and germane in respect of Criminal Leave to Appeal No.253/17 may be recapitulated as infra:
(i) Inspector, Anti-Corruption Bureau, lodged First Information Report (FIR) No.44/2000 on 11th of February 2000, inter-alia, stating therein that from reliable sources he came to know about wrongful loss of lakhs of rupees caused to the exchequer in deposition of registration charges of vehicles with the District Transport Office, Pali. The report further unfurled that due to connivance of vehicle drivers/their representatives and employees of District Transport Officer, Pali, instead of third leaf of challan, by filling fourth leaf amount was deposited with the Bank for registration of vehicles. The estimated loss to the State Government for the interregnum period from July 1997 to September 1997 is indicated
