Smt.goreti Minj Vs Lalsai

This appeal is filed against the judgment and order dated 24.02.2012 passed by learned Session Judge, Jashpur (C.G.) passed in Criminal Appeal No. 38/2011 whereby the learned appellate Court partly allowed the appeal filed by the respondent against the judgment dated 20.09.2011 passed in Complaint Case No.17/2010 and confirmed the conviction under Section 294 of IPC and acquitted the respondent from charges under Sections 4 and 5 of the Chhattisgarh Tonahi Pratadana Nivaran Act, 2005 (for short, “the Act, 2005).

¶15

Brief facts of the case are that the appellant/complainant filed the complaint against the respondent before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jashpur under Sections 456/34, 294,

¶16

2

¶17

506-B of IPC and Section 4 and 5 of the Act, 2005 on the ground that respondent and other accused persons on 12.11.2009 at about 12.00 am went to the house of complainant and all accused persons entered into the house of Ajit Khalakho and threatened his wife to kill as well as to implicate them in false case. As such, the complainant filed complaint against the accused persons.

¶18

The learned trial Court after hearing both the parties convicted the accused/respondent Lalsai under Section 294 of IPC and Section 4 and 5 of the Act 2005 and acquitted the other accused persons. The respondent Lalsai filed appeal against the conviction. The learned appellate Court partly allowed the appeal of the respondent and confirmed the conviction and sentence under Section 294 of IPC and acquitted the respondent from the charges under Sections 4 and 5 of the Act 2005. Hence, this appeal filed by the appellant.

¶19

The learned counsel for appellant submits that the learned trial Court rightly convicted the respondent but the learned appellate Court did not appreciate the oral and documentary evidence and passed the judgment dated 24.02.2012 without considering the material and evidence properly. The complainant and other witnesses categorically stated that the respondent condemned the complainant as “Tonahi” and “Dayan” but the learned trial Court only on minor contradiction and omission acquitted the respondent. The finding recorded

¶20

3

¶21

by the learned appellate Court is not based on proper appreciation of oral and documentary evidence and is against the law and facts of the case. As such, this impugned order is liable to be set aside.

¶22

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent supported the impugned order.

¶23

Heard both the counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶24

The learned appellate Court appreciated evidence of all witnesses and partly allowed the appeal of respondent/accused and confirmed the conviction under Section 294 of IPC and acquitted the respondent from the charges under Section 4 and 5 of the Act, 2005.

¶25

The Hon’ble Apex Court in its latest judgment dated 12.02.2024 passed in Mallappa and Ors. Versus State of Karnataka held in para 36 as under:-

¶26

36. Our criminal jurisprudence is essentially based on the promise that no innocent shall be condemned as guilty. All the safeguards and the jurisprudential values of criminal law, are intended to prevent any failure of justice. The principles which come into play while deciding an appeal from acquittal could be summarized as:-

¶27

4

¶28

“(i) Appreciation of evidence is the core element of a criminal trial and such appreciation must be comprehensive--inclusive of all evidence, oral and documentary;

¶29

(II) Partial or selective appreciation of evidence may result in a miscarriage of justice and is in itself a ground of challenge;

¶30

(iii) If the Court, after appreciation of evidence, finds that two views are possible, the one in favour of the accused shall ordinarily be followed;

¶31

(iv) If the view of the Trial Court is a legally plausible view, mere possibility of a contrary view shall not justify the reversal of acquittal;

¶32

(v) If the appellate Court is inclined to reverse the acquittal in appeal on a re-appreciation of evidence, it must specifically address all the reasons given by the Trial Court for acquittal and must cover all the facts;

¶33

(vi) In a case of reversal from acquittal to conviction, the appellate Court must demonstrate an illegality, perversity or error of law or fact in the decision of the Trial Court.”

¶34

In the light of the above judgment, in the present case it is clear that the learned appellate Court minutely appreciated the evidence of all witnesses and partly allowed the appeal of respondent. The view which has been taken by the learned appellate Court appears to be plausible and possible view and in the absence of any patent illegality or perversity this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment. As such, this acquittal appeal is dismissed.

Sd/-

(Rajani Dubey)

Judge

Uttej

Smt.goreti Minj v. Lalsai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.goreti Minj v. Lalsai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chandadevi Shrivastava Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Kuleshwar Prasad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Cg.Rajya Sahakari Vipran Sangh and Anr. Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Anr.

C.G. State Industrial Devl. Corp. Ltd. Vs State of C.G. and Ors.

Jogeshwar Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Smt. Malti Agrawal Vs State Bank Of India