1 State of Rajasthan Vs. Vishal S.B. CRIMINAL LEAVE TO APPEAL NO.03/2008 (State of Rajasthan Vs. Vishal) Date of order :: 31.1.2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr.S.N. Tiwari, Public Prosecutor. The State has preferred this criminal leave to appeal challenging the judgment dated 21st September, 2007 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocity) Cases, Jodhpur in Sessions Case No.23/2006, whereby the learned Special Judge has acquitted the accused non-petitioner for the charges of offences under Sections 451, 323, 427 IPC read with Section 3 (i) (x) of the SC/ST Act. According to brief facts of the case, a complaint was filed by complainant Om Prakash in police station Soorsagar, Jodhpur alleging that on 06.03.2006 his wife Smt. Heera was sitting in the house alone, then non-petitioner entered in his house and while threatening his wife to kill used filthy language and defamatory words. It is also alleged that for past 6 and 7 months, non-petitioner was regularly abusing and threatening his wife Smt. Heera in 2 State of Rajasthan Vs. Vishal drunken condition. It is also alleged in the complaint that non- petitioner harassed his neighbourers namely Jamana, Uma, Shravan Singh and Daibai and also tried to break the doors of the houses of Shravan Singh, Ashok and pushed his wife and as a result of which she fell down. Upon this complaint, police registered an FIR against non-petitioner and after usual investigation challan was filed against him. Learned trial court after framing charges against the non-petitioner for the above offences examined as many as nine prosecution witnesses. Thereafter, statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded and non-petitioner was granted opportunity to lead evidence in his defence. The non-petitioner examined one witness DW-1 Ramesh Chandra in his defence. Thereafter, learned trial court after hearing both the parties and perusing record and evidence of the case, acquitted the non-petitioner for the alleged offences on the ground that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently argued that learned trial court has committed an error while not appreciating evidence in right perspective. The prosecution has proved its case 3 State of Rajasthan Vs. Vishal beyond reasonable doubt. Learned Public Prosecutor while emphasising upon statement of PW-1 Smt. Heera contended that Smt. Heera has categorically proved the allegations levelled against the non-petitioner in her statement. But learned trial court has committed an error while not considering her statement in right perspective. Therefore, the judgment under challenge is erroneous and deserves to be quashed and set aside. It is further argued that in the statements of PW-3 Smt. Uma, PW-4 Smt. Jamna and PW-8 Smt. Dali, it is categorically stated that the statement of PW-1 Smt. Heera is true. These witnesses have fully supported the statement of Smt. Heera, therefore, learned trial court has committed an error while acquitting the non-petitioner from the charges levelled against him. Therefore, the judgment dated 21st September, 2007 deserves to be quashed and set aside and leave to appeal may be allowed. I have perused the impugned judgment, so also, finding of the learned trial court. The learned trial court after considering entire evidence and more specifically statement of PW-1 Smt. Heera arrived at with 4 State of Rajasthan Vs. Vishal the finding that there is material contradiction in the statement given by Smt. Heera wife of complainant. She is not supporting her own allegations as narrated in the FIR, so also, in the statement before Police under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The learned trial court after considering the entire evidence arrived at with the finding that prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Learned trial court has also considered the statement of other witnesses, who are not fully supporting the statement of Smt. Heera. In these circumstances, in my opinion, the learned trial court has not committed any error while acquitting non-petitioner from the charges levelled against him, because as per finding given by learned trial court, the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, present criminal leave to appeal is hereby rejected. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. A.K. Chouhan/-