Crl. Appeal preferred against acquittal of accused for Section 500 IPC. Trial court found appellant failed to adduce evidence leading to discharge of prosecution case. Appeal dismissed as no infirmity found.
Criminal appeal dismissed holding that no interference warranted with trial court's decision to acquit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl.Appeal No.483-SB of 2009 DATE OF DECISION: July 19, 2011
Pardeep Kumar
Prem Sagar
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA
Present: Mr.Ashish Gupta, Advocate for the appellant
None for the respondent
..
RAJAN GUPTA, J. : (Oral)
The present appeal has been preferred against the order dated 7.7.2008 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridkot acquitting the accused of charge under section 500 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the appellant has assailed the order on the ground that appellant took all measures to adduce evidence. However, the trial court came to an erroneous conclusion that despite several opportunities, complainant had failed to adduce evidence and thus, acquitted the accused.
The appellant had filed a complaint on the allegation that accused had filed a false complaint against him before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Faridkot. He had levelled false allegations in the said complaint. The accused had also made false representation dated 18.2.2003 to SSP, Faridkot and dated 23.5.2003 to DSP,
Crl.Appeal No.483-SB of 2009
- 2 -
Dharamkot. The accused alleged that appellant and his father-in-law had forcibly entered the petrol pump belonging to the accused and also that they dealt in opium trade. The accused also alleged that appellant alongwith his father-in-law had looted an amount of Rs.4,500/- by breaking the petrol pump. The complaint was thus preferred by appellant Pardeep Kumar on the allegation that accused had tarnished his image and defamed him.
After recording prosecution evidence, the accused was summoned to face trial on 26.2.2007 for commission of offence under section 500 IPC. The accused thereafter surrendered and was enlarged on bail. After framing of charge, however, appellant failed to adduce any evidence. In the absence of any incriminating evidence, the trial court dispensed with recording of statement of the accused under section 313 Cr.P.C. The accused was acquitted.
Learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to point out any infirmity in the impugned order. I am thus, of the considered view that no interference is warranted in the case. Hence, the appeal stands dismissed.
July 19, 2011 pc
( RAJAN GUPTA ) JUDGE
2
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can interfere with the trial court's acquittal where the appellant failed to adduce evidence after the trial court's own observation that the complainant failed to do so.
Whether the trial court erred in dispensing with recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in the absence of incriminating evidence.
Whether the decision of High Court Judge Rajan Gupta to dismiss the criminal appeal against acquittal was correct.
Pardeep Kumar
Prem Sagar
RAJAN GUPTA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
