State of Chhattisgarh Vs Balwant Sahu

¶1

2024:CGHC:29852

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶4

CRMP No. 150 of 2023

¶5

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Pandari, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶6

... Petitioner

¶7

versus

¶8

1 - Balwant Sahu S/o Late Shiv Prasad Sahu Aged About 32 Years R/o Ward No. 29, Street No. 2, Shiv Nagar, Telugu Mohalla, Police Station Pandari, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶9

2 - Mukesh Sahu S/o Late Shiv Prasad Sahu Aged About 26 Years R/o Ward No. 29, Street No. 2, Shiv Nagar, Telugu Mohalla, Police Station Pandari, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

For Petitioners : Mr. Ajit Singh, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. F.S. Khare, Advocate

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Order on Board

¶13

08.08 .2024

¶14

1. The State has sought leave to appeal against the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 10.06.2022 passed in Criminal Case No. 13640/2015 (State of Chhattisgarh Vs. Balwant Sahu and Another) by the court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.), whereby the learned trial Court has acquitted the accused/respondent from the charges punishable under Sections 294, 323 read with Section 34, 506 Part-II of IPC in connection with crime No. 211/2015, registered at Police Station Pandari District Raipur (C.G.) by giving benefit of doubt

¶15

Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2024.08.24 11:30:22 +0530

¶16

holding that the prosecution has failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt.

¶17

2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 10.06.2015 and 14.06.2015 at Shankar Nagar Chowk, the accused/respondents have abused the complainant Rameshwar Bariha in filthy language at public place and have assaulted him with hand and fist and also threatened him to kill. On the basis of aforesaid complaint, crime was registered against the respondent/ accused and the matter was taken into investigation. Thereafter, on completion of investigation in the matter, charge-sheet was submitted and after framing of charges, the prosecution examined witness in support of its case and thereafter statements of prosecution witnesses were recorded. Thus, the learned trial Court did not find the evidence properly proving the guilt of the accused/respondents therefore, acquitted the respondents/accused from the aforesaid offence. Hence, the present criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed seeking leave to appeal.

¶18

3. Mr. Ajit Singh, learned Government Advocate appearing for the Petitioner/State would submit that the accused persons threatened the complainant to kill with intention and in the statement of the witnesses which categorically supported the case of prosecution. On the date of incident, when the injury inflicted by the accused is not the simple injury and the same was grievous injury with intention to kill the complainant. However the learned trial Court failed to appreciate the said evidences and acquitted the respondent from commission of aforesaid offences. He lastly contended that the finding acquittal recorded by the

¶19

learned trial Court is unjust, improper and bad in law, therefore the same is liable to be set-aside.

¶20

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondents supported the impugned judgment and further submits that there is no illegality or infirmity in the finding of learned trial Court and the impugned judgment of the learned court below needs no interference.

¶21

5. I have heard the learned Government Advocate appearing for the petitioner/State and perused the record of the case including the impugned judgment of acquittal.

¶22

6. Learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur, District Raipur, (C.G.) while acquitting the respondent has held in the impugned judgment that after providing ample opportunities to the prosecution to record the evidence of its witnesses, the prosecution has failed to record the evidence of any of its witnesses. No witness has been examined by the prosecution. In such a situation the case of the prosecution appears to be doubtful and it is well known principle that the benefit of doubt goes to the accused and should be given to. Thus, the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, accused/respondent is acquitted of the alleged crime for the aforesaid offence.

¶23

7. Considering the findings recorded by the learned trial Court, acquitting the respondent/accused from aforesaid offences, this Court does not find any reason to allow criminal miscellaneous petition seeking grant of leave to appeal.

¶24

8. For the foregoing reasons, the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition seeking for leave to appeal being totally devoid of merits the same is rejected.

¶25

9. Consequently, the appeal stands dismissed .

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

(Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge

¶28

Jyoti

State of Chhattisgarh v. Balwant Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Chhattisgarh v. Balwant Sahu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt.shashikanta Golchha Vs Shri Saket Bandhu @ Saket Chaturvedi

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Sudhanshu Ram Rajwade

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Daulatram Sonkar

Dewangan Sunglass Vs Nirdesh Diwan

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Surendra Choubey

Mohd. Sanowar Khan @ Tanar @ Sanu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh