Dismissed

Hanuman Prasad v. State and Ors.

Rajasthan HC25 Jul 2017CRLA/408/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed leave to appeal by the State and appeal by the complainant against acquittal. The court upheld the trial court's finding that the complainant's narrative regarding injuries from a falling under a jeep was fabricated and devoid of merit. The impugned judgment acquittal against the respondents is affirmed.

What did the court decide?

Leave to appeal filed by the State and appeal preferred by the complainant were dismissed; impugned judgment of acquittal affirmed.

Hanuman Prasad Vs State and Ors. — Quashing and FIR | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Crml Leave To Appeal No. 22 / 2014

State of Rajasthan

----Appellant

Versus

1.Satpal son of Chandgi Ram by caste Swami R/o Nohar, (Jogiaasan), P.S. Nohar, District Hanumangarh

¶7

Bhal Singh son of Devi Singh by caste Rajput R/o Ratusar, Police Station Nohar, District Hanumangarh.

¶8

----Respondent Connected With

¶9

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 408 / 2013 Hanuman Prasad s/o Shri Roop Ram, by caste Swami, resident of Nohar, District Hanumangarh.

¶10

Versus

¶11

The State of Rajasthan

¶12

2.Satpal son of Chandgi Ram by caste Swami R/o Nohar, (Jogiaasan), P.S. Nohar, District Hanumangarh

¶13

Bhal Singh S/o Shri Devi Singh, by caste Rajput resident of Ratusar, P.S. Nohar, District Hanumangarh.

¶14

For Appellant(s) : Mr. R.K.Bohra, P.P. and Mr. G.R.Bhari

¶15

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kuldeep Sharma

¶16

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

¶17

Judgment/Order

¶18

25/07/2017

¶19

The instant leave to appeal application as well as the appeal preferred respectively by the State of Rajasthan and the complainant Hanuman Prasad are directed against the judgment dated 20.3.2013 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.1,

¶20

(2 of 3)

¶21

Nohar in Sessions Case No. 25/2011 whereby the learned trial court acquitted the respondents from the charges under Sections 365/34 and 307/34 IPC and while holding the accused respondent Satpal guilty for the offence under Section 323 IPC granted him benefit of probation.

¶22

I have heard and considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel representing the parties and have gone through the impugned judgment as well as the record.

¶23

The complainant Hanuman Prasad stated in his evidence that he was going on a bicycle and the accused persons were following him in a jeep which was being driven by Satpal. They tried to forcibly pull him into the jeep but could not succeed. He rode the cycle at a fast pace. Near Gandhi Chowk, Satpal tried to run the jeep over him but he managed to save himself. There was a tree and gate near the Hanuman Temple with which the jeep collided and turned turtle. The complainant stated that he came under the jeep and was entangled in the tyres thereof. The trial court, while appreciating the evidence took note of the fact that the Medical Officer P.W. 9 Dr. Jitendra Soni stated that when he examined the injured Hanuman Prasad he found few abrasions on his hands and he was complaining of pain in the chest region. The doctor further admitted in the cross examination that the injuries could be caused by a fall and in case a person comes under a jeep there would be a high probability of receiving injuries on the back. Evidently, the story of the complainant that he came under the jeep being driven by the accused Satpal is per-se false and

¶24

(3 of 3)

¶25

fabricated. The nature of injuries received by the injured belies his allegations.

¶26

Consequently, I firmly express my agreement with the reasoning given by the trial court in the impugned judgment for acquitting the accused respondents from the charges under Section 365/34 and 307/34. The impugned judgment does not suffer from any shortcoming either factual or legal so as to require interference. Consequently, the instant application for leave to appeal filed by the State of Rajasthan as well as the appeal preferred by the complainant Hanuman Prasad are dismissed as being devoid of merit. A copy of the judgment be placed in each file.

¶27

(SANDEEP MEHTA)J.

¶28

/sushil/

Hanuman Prasad v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hanuman Prasad v. State and Ors.

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

Sintu Ram and Ors. Vs State

Mohd. Hussain Vs State and Ors.

Prakash Kumar Vs Dilip Singh and Anr.

State Vs Sukhpreet Singh and Anr.

Khemraj Vs Bhumi Vikas Bank and Anr.

Hemant Kumar Vs Manish Bhandari