Dismissed

The State of Chhattisgarh, v. Kapoore Sahu @ Jitendra

Chhattisgarh HC1 Jul 2019CRMP/1045/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court condoned a 53-day delay in filing an application for leave to appeal. It dismissed the application because the trial court acquitted the accused, and the evidence revealed disputed circumstances regarding the prosecutrix's relationship and the incident that justified the acquittal.

What did the court decide?

Application for leave to appeal is dismissed;

The State of Chhattisgarh, Vs Kapoore Sahu @… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Chhattisgarh HC (2019)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

CRMP No. 1045 of 2019

¶4

The State Of Chhattisgarh, Through - Police Station, Tikrapara, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶5

---- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Kapoore Sahu @ Jitendra, S/o Radheshyam Sahu, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Gokul Nagar, Ram Nagar, Gudiyari, Police Station Gudiyari, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶8

---- Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner Shri Santosh Bharat, PL

¶10

Hon'ble Justice Mr. Prashant Kumar Mishra

¶11

Hon'ble Justice Mr. Gautam Chourdiya

¶12

Order On Board by Prashant Kumar Mishra J.

¶13

01/07/2019

¶14

On due consideration, IA No.1/2019, application for condonation of delay in filing the application for leave to appeal, is allowed and the delay of 53 days in filing the application is condoned.

¶15

The Trial Court has acquitted the accused from the charges 450, 376, 323 & 506 of IPC.

¶16

The prosecutrix is a lady, aged about 32 years, residing as the wife of PW-2 Khomlal, though they are not legally married. The evidence available on record would suggest that PW-2 Khomlal, with whom the prosecutrix resides, is working with accused Kapoore Sahu @ Jitendra. There is material available on record that Kapoore Sahu is a vegetable merchant, whereas the

¶17

prosecutrix's husband is a transporter who usually carries on the accused's vegetables to different places for delivery. On the date of incident, the accused came to the house of the deceased and committed forcible sexual intercourse, which was disclosed to PW2 Khemlal Sahu about 2-3 days afterwards and the FIR was lodged 2-3 days thereafter. Thus, there is delay of about a week in lodging of FIR.

¶18

Reading of the deposition of PW-1 (prosecutrix) and PW-2 Khemlal Sahu would also reveal that on and from the date of incident, there was a dispute between the accused and Khomlal Sahu of transaction involving 28,000/-. This amount was to be paid by Khomlal Sahu to the accused but he was not returning the same, which was actually returned by him after the accused was incarcerated and later released on bail. This fact has been admitted by the prosecutrix in para 17 of her deposition. The tenor of her statement and the attending circumstances do not rule out an understanding and relationship between the prosecutrix and the accused and the prosecutrix being 32 years of age, we are not inclined to admit this application seeking leave to appeal for the reason that if two views are possible and the Trial Court has taken one possible view in the matter while acquitting the accused, the same cannot be unsettled by the Appellate Court.

¶19

Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal deserves to be and is hereby dismissed.

¶20

Sd/Sd/Prashant Kumar Mishra Gautam Chourdiya Judge Judge

¶21

Nirala

The State of Chhattisgarh, v. Kapoore Sahu @ Jitendra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Chhattisgarh, v. Kapoore Sahu @ Jitendra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Ramkumar Soni

Umend Singh Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Khemram