Acquittal upheld due to lack of credible evidence contradicting trial court's findings under appropriate legal standards.

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Deputy Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

03.07.2025

1. It transpires from the order dated 23.08.2024 that due to an inadvertent mistake, the application filed by the State for grant of leave to appeal has been admitted though only trial Court was summoned and no bailable warrant was issued, the paper book has already been prepared, hence we proceed to hear the State on leave to appeal.

2. I.A. No. No. 01 of 2024, is an application for condonation of delay of

291 days in filing the instant petition for leave to appeal.

3. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed Delay in filing the petition for leave to appeal is condoned.

4. By way of present petition filed under Section 378(3) of the Cr.P.C., 1973, the State has sought leave to appeal against the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 23.05.2023 passed by the learned First Upper Sessions Judge, District- Jashpur (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No.30/2022 by which, the respondent / accused has been acquitted of the charges punishable under Sections 354, 450, 307 of the IPC.

5. The prosecution story, in brief, is that, the complainant (victim), in the noon time of 19.06.2022 at about 02.30, lodged a complaint at Police Station-Tapkara, District-Jashpur, (C.G.) to the effect that, on 19.06.2022 at about 2.30 AM, she (victim) was alone at home, where the accused (Shrawan Sai) hold the hand of victim and took her inside the house and thrown to the ground with bad intentions. He was suppressed the mouth-voice of prosecutrix "save me" (bachao-bachao), then, he slit her throat with knife, she kicked to him, then, he run away. Due to which, she get injury and blood started coming out from her injury. She holds her injured throat and cried loudly. Her Devrani & Chachi Sas approached the spot, after listening the crying of the prosecutrix and narrated to them about the incident. During, the investigation, Sections 354, 450, 307 of IPC were lodged in the FIR (Ex.P/01), Mauka Naksha- (Ex.P/02), incident place Nazri Naksha-(Ex.P/03), The statements (memorandum statement) of the witnesses- Naksha-(Ex.P/07), incident used article (weapon)- Ex.P/08, query report- Ex.P/10, Arrest warrant panchnama & intimation-Ex.P/13, 14 & 15 & FSL Report intimation- Ex.P/16, 17, 18, 19 & 20 were seized and after completing certain formalities, the accused was arrested. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet under aforesaid Sections of the IPC. against the accused respondent was filed before the learned trial Court.

6. After appreciating the evidence on record, learned trial Court did not believe the evidence proving guilt of the respondent and, therefore, acquitted him from the offence charged under Section U/s 354, 450, 307 of IPC. Hence, this appeal.

7. Learned State counsel submits that though the scope of interference with the order of acquittal is very much limited but on the other hand the appellate Court is vested with wide powers of re-appreciation of the evidence in the matter. It is the settled position of law that, if reappraisal of the evidence goes to show that the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial Court is unjust and perverse then the appellate Court is empowered to set aside the same and reverse the order of acquittal and convict the accused appropriately. The learned trial Court has erred by acquitting the respondent from the offences charged and has not appreciated the deposition of the prosecution witnesses, therefore, judgment of acquittal be set aside. Further, the peculiar fact and circums