Dismissed

Ramlal v. State of Chhattisgarh and Anr.

Chhattisgarh HC22 Nov 2017CRR/326/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Highest Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed a revision petition challenging the acquittal of the father-in-law accused of wife-beating and abatement of life. The court held that the acquittal was just and proper as two views were possible, and such findings favored for the accused cannot be reversed in revision.

What did the court decide?

Revision petition against acquittal was dismissed; findings of acquittal were upheld.

Ramlal Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Anr. — Writ and Judicial Review | Chhattisgarh HC (2017)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

CRR No. 326 of 2006

¶4

Ramlal, S/o. Puniram Pal, Aged 45 years, R/o. vikas Nagar, Bodari, PS Chakarbhata, Tah. & District Bilaspur (CG)

¶5

---- Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Chhattisgarh, Through District Magistrate bilaspur CG

¶8

Hemlal, S/o. Chintaram Gadariya, Aged 55 years, R/o. Bilha, Tahsil and PS Bilha, District Bilaspur (CG)

¶9

---- Respondents

¶10

For Applicant : None present. For Respondent No.1/State : Shri Vivek Sharma, G.A. For Respondent No.2 : Shri Parag Kotecha, Advocate

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Pritinker Diwaker

¶12

Order On Board

¶13

22/11/2017

¶14

Challenge in the present revision is to the judgment and order dated 18.04.06 passed by the Eighth Sessions Judge Bilaspur in S.T. No. 27/06 whereby the court below has acquitted the accused/respondent No.2 of the offence under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC.

¶15

Brief facts of the case are that deceased Laxmin Bai who died in the intervening night of 8-9.11.05 after hanging herself. Non-applicant No.2 is the father-in-law of the deceased. Merg intimation was lodged by Rohit Kumar (PW-8) vide Ex.P-9. During merg enqiry it revealed that it is the respondent No.2/accused because of whom deceased committed suicide and accordingly offence under Section 306 IPC was

¶16

registered against respondent No.2. After filing of the charge sheet, trial judge framed charge against the accused/respondent No. 2 under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC.

¶17

Prosecution has examined 12 witnesses in support of its case. Statements of the respondent No.2/accused were also recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which he denied the charges levelled against him and pleaded false implication in the case.

¶18

After hearing the parties, the trial Court, vide its judgment dated 18.04.06 has acquitted the accused/respondent No.2 of the offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC. Hence the present revision by the applicant father of the deceased, assailing the acquittal.

¶19

While considering the judgment it has been observed by the trial judge that initially no ingredients of Section 306 PC were alleged against the accused and according to the prosecution, deceased was murdered by the accused/respondent No.2, trial judge has further considered the aspect that PW-1, PW-3, PW-9 and PW-10 have not made any allegation aganst the accused. It has been further observed by the trial judge that allegation against the accused for committing themurder of the deceased is also exaggerated one and the medical report does not support the same.

¶20

From the evidence of PW-1 it is apparent that PW-1, 2,3,8 9 and 10 it is apparent that there are no serious allegations against the appellant for committing the offence and as such the trial court was justified in not believing the statement of these witnesses and has arrived at a particular conclusion to acquit the respondent NO.2/accused.

¶21

After hearing counsel for the parties and considering the material available on record as well as the elaborate judgment impugned passed by the Court below, and being very much conscious of the existing legal position that in a revision against acquittal if two views are possible on the basis of the evidence led by the prosecution and the trial Court taking one view favoured the accused, reversion of the findings of acquittal by the appellate Court taking the other possible view into consideration, is not permissible in law and further considering the scope of revision against acquittal, we are of the considered opinion that the judgment impugned acquitting the respondents/accused of the offence under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC are just and proper and does not call for any interference. Revision is accordingly dismissed.

¶22

Sd/-

¶23

(Pritinker Diwaker)

¶24

JUdge

Ramlal v. State of Chhattisgarh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramlal v. State of Chhattisgarh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Phagua and Another Vs the State of M.P.

Mangal Prasad Yadav Vs State of C.G.

Domar Singh Yadu Vs Shri Shivnandan Chandrakar

Leela Ram Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Gulabdhar Dubey and Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Laxmi Prasad Sahu Vs the State of M.P.