Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
R.K. Merathia, Rakesh Ranjan Prasad, JJ.
Rupam Rimpi Verma – Appellants.
Vs.
Dr. Pranay Verma, Shri Prem Prakash Verma, Smt. Vina Verma and State of Jharkhand – Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (D.B.) No. 1608 of 2009
Decided On : 28.04.2011
Acquittal - Section 498A of the I.P.C. - Summary: The court dismissed the petition for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment acquitting the opposite parties under Section 498A of the I.P.C. The court found that the learned trial court rightly acquitted the opposite parties on cogent reasons after considering the respective cases of the parties and the materials brought on record by them.
Fact of the Case:
The petition was filed for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment acquitting the opposite parties under Section 498A of the I.P.C. read with Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that no grounds were made out for interference with the impugned judgment and accordingly dismissed the petition.
Issues: The issues revolved around the grounds for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal under Section 498A of the I.P.C.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the fact that the learned trial court rightly acquitted the opposite parties on cogent reasons after considering the respective cases of the parties and the materials brought on record by them.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed with no costs.
1. This petition has been filed for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment dated 9.4.2009 passed in P.C.R. Case No. 122 of 2004/T. R. No. 175 of 2009 by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st class, Dumka acquitting the opposite parties under Section 498A of the I.P.C. read with Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. Mr. Manoj Tandan, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner assailed the impugned judgment on various grounds and submitted that the evidences on record made out a case for conviction, but the findings of the acquittal has been wrongly recorded, and therefore, it is a fit case for grant of leave to appeal.
3. On the other hand, Mr. Mazumdar, learned senior counsel appearing for the private opposite parties supporting the acquittal referred to the paragraphs 20, 21, 22 and 23 of the impugned judgment.
4. It appears that after considering the respective cases of the parties and the materials brought on record by them, in detail, the learned trial court rightly acquitted the opposite parties on cogent reasons, while discussing the materials brought on record by the parties.
5. In our opinion, no grounds are made out for interference with the impugned judgment.
6. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. However, no costs.
Petition dismissed.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
