The High Court dismissed the State's application for leave to appeal challenging the additional sessions judge's acquittal of the respondent under Section 376 IPC. The court found no merit in challenging the trial court's appreciation of evidence regarding delay and absence of injury.
Application for grant of leave to appeal is 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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Leave To Appeal No. 93 / 2016
State of Rajasthan
----Appellant
Versus
Surajkaran son of Hazari
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Prakash Thakuria, Public Prosecutor For Respondent(s) : None present
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
/ Order
07/12/2017
Instant application for grant of leave to appeal has been preferred by the State of Rajasthan in order to assail the impugned judgment dated 05.01.2016 rendered by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Kekri District Ajmer, whereby the said Court acquitted the accused-respondent of offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.
The ld. trial Court, in the facts and circumstances of the case, held that the delay of thirteen days in lodging of the report is a material circumstance, especially when no external or internal injury has been found on the body of the prosecutrix (name withheld to protect her identity) and on her private parts. The ld. trial Court further noted that a typed report was submitted and in the said report, it was not stated that as to when at first instance, prosecutrix had narrated the alleged occurrence to her family members and if so, to whom and at what time.
In this context, ld. trial court noted that the prosecutrix, her husband and sons admitted that the accused has filed a complaint
(2 of 2)
[CRLLA-93/2016]
against them regarding encroachment made by them over a pasture land.
The impugned judgment rendered by the ld. trial Court is based on appreciation of evidence. The view formulated by the ld. trial Court is one view, which is possible on the facts and circumstances of the case, hence, no interference is warranted
Consequently, the present application for grant of leave to
appeal, being devoid of merits, is dismissed.
(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA)J.
ashok
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the trial court's view regarding delay in lodging report and lack of medical injury in an acquittal under Section 376 IPC.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
State of Rajasthan
Surajkaran son of Hazari
Kanwalsingh Ahluwalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
