Single judge dismissed the crossed revision application seeking leave to appeal against acquittal. Court found no perversity in lower court's dismissal of complaint due to lack of specificity in allegations and absence of cogent evidence.
Application for leave to appeal against acquittal dismissed.
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.
CRM-A No.917-MA of 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-A No.917-MA of 2011
Date of decision : 17.08.2012
Jaswinder Kaur
...Applicant-appellant
Versus
Chamkaur Singh and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN
Present: Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Advocate, for Mr. S.K. Chawla, Advocate, for the applicant-appellant.
JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral)
The applicant has preferred this application under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of leave to appeal, feeling aggrieved against the judgment and order dated 09.10.2010, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Faridkot, whereby the complaint filed by the applicant has been dismissed and the accused-respondents have been acquitted of the charges framed against them.
Heard.
Though, there is an long delay of 254 days in filing the
present application, however, this Court has scanned the entire paper
CRM-A No.917-MA of 2011
book on merits and no case for interference is made out. The allegations levelled by the applicant are misconceived and lack specificity which were not supported by leading cogent evidence. Mere bald allegations cannot form the basis for convicting the accused respondents. The learned trial Court has given detailed reasons while dismissing the complaint of the applicant. Therefore, this Court does not find any perversity or illegality in the impugned order. The view taken by the learned trial Court is best and possible view and no other view could have been taken
Hence, no ground for grant of leave to file an appeal is
made out.
Dismissed.
17.08.2012 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether leave to appeal under Section 378(4) CrPC should be granted against acquittal of respondents.
Whether the impugned order of acquittal was perverse or illogical.
Jaswinder Kaur
Chamkaur Singh and others
Jitendra Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
