CRMP 400/2016

1

NAFR

HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

CRMP

No. 400 of 2016

Order reserved on 01

.02.2022

Order

delivered on

09.02.2022

•

Smt. Sushma Keshri W/o Dilip Keshri aged about 36 Years R/o

Village- Ramanujgunj, Ward No. 12, Police Station-

Ramanujgunj, District- Balrampur- Ramanujgunj, Civil District -

Sarguja, Revenue District - Balrampur, Chhattisgarh

------Petitioner/Complainant

VERSUS

1. Rajesh Keshri S/o Late Rajkumar Keshri Aged About 35 Years

2. Anita Keshri W/o Rajesh Keshri Aged About 30 Years

3. Vinod Keshri S/o Late Rajkumar Keshri Aged About 38 Years

All are R/o Village Ramanujganj, Ward No. 12, Police Station-

Ramanujganj, District Balrampur, Ramanujganj, Civil District-

Sarguja, Revenue District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh

4. The State of Chhattisgarh through P.S. Ramanujganj, District

Balrampur, Chhattisgarh.

-------Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Prasad, Advocate

For Respondent 1 to 3 : Mr. Vikas Pandey, Advocate

For Respondent 4 : Mr. Shivnath Shrivas, Panel Lawyer

S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

(proceedings through video conferencing)

C.A.V. Order

1. Petitioner has preferred this criminal miscellaneous petition

seeking leave under Section 378(4) of CrPC to file appeal

challenging the order of acquittal passed by Judicial Magistrate,

First Class, Ramanujganj, Balrampur in criminal case No.

145/2013 acquitting the respondents 1 to 3 (Respondents) from

the charges of offence punishable under Sections 294, 323 and

323 r/w Section 34 of IPC.

CRMP 400/2016

2

2. Petitioner filed an application under Section 200 of CrPC before

the Judicial Magistrate First Class. After recording preliminary

evidence, case was registered and charges as mentioned above

were framed against Respondents. After recording of evidence of

complainant and her witnesses, trial Court passed the impugned

order of acquittal.

3. Mr. A.K. Prasad, learned counsel for petitioner would submit that

Respondents in furtherance of common intention assaulted

complainant and her husband by hands and fist. They also

abused them in filthy language in a public place. Complainant

and her witnesses in their evidence have very categorically

supported the allegations against Respondents levelled in the

complaint including the independent witness namely Nanhuram,

PW-3. Doctor S.K. Sinha, PW-5, who conducted MLC has stated

that the complainant suffered injuries on the date of incident

which are simple in nature. PW-6 also stated that Dileep Keshari

also suffered injuries over his person. Learned trial Court

overlooking the evidence of the complainant PW-1, her husband

Dileep Keshari PW-2 and other witnesses has erroneously

recorded finding that the complainant failed to prove the charges

against Respondents under Section 294, 323 & 323 r/w Section

34 of IPC beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted them. Finding

recorded by trial Court is perverse to the evidence available on

record, hence, application for grant of leave be allowed and

direction be issued for registering acquittal appeal along with

application for grant of leave.

4. Mr. Vikas Pandey, learned counsel for Respondents 1 to 3 would

submit that learned trial Court upon considering the evidence,

CRMP 400/2016

3

documentary and oral, available on record and appreciating the

same has passed the judgment which does not call for any

interference. Respondents in their defence have examined one

Pramod Kumar Nag as witness who in his evidence, very

categorically stated that on the date of incident Vinod Keshari

went to Ambikapur along with him for official work and returned

back only in the night at 08:00 p.m. Finding recorded by the trial

Court is on appreciation of evidence, there are material

contradictions and