[1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR JUDGMENT S.B. CRIMINAL LEAVE TO APPEAL NO. 138/2008 STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. BHAGURAM & ORS. Date: 04.07.2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE Mr. B.S. Chhaba, Public Prosecutor for the State. **** The present criminal leave to appeal under Section 378(i)(iii) Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment dated 16.08.2007 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Sikar in Special Case No. 4/2006, whereby the accused-respondents Bhaguram and Hardayal have been acquitted from the offences under Sections 323, 336, 427 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and accused- respondent Anandi Lal has been acquitted from the offences under Sections 323, 336 and 427 IPC while giving them the benefit of doubt. The appellant State being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment dated 16.08.2007, has preferred the instant criminal leave to appeal on the ground that the trial Court seriously erred in not considering the statements of the prosecution witnesses. Further the trial Court has not carefully gone through the documents i.e. written report, Naksha Mauka (Site Plan), [2] formal report etc. and there is no reason to disbelieve the statement of complainant Sitaram, in which he has stated that there was marriage of his daughter on 09.11.2005 and when the marriage procession reached in front of his house, the accused-respondents came there and abused, misbehaved and manhandled with the other persons. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and carefully gone through the impugned judgment dated 16.08.2007. The trial Court has thoroughly examined the prosecution witnesses which were as many as 8 in number including the statement of PW1 Sitaram, the complainant. There is contradiction in the complaint and in the examination-in-chief of PW1 Sitaram. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as the evidence available on the record, since the prosecution utterly failed to prove the offence under Sections 323, 336, 427 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the accused- respondents, therefore, while giving benefit of doubt, they have rightly been acquitted by the trial Court from the aforesaid offences vide impugned judgment dated 16.08.2007. The appellant is not able to make out any case against the accused-respondents which requires any interference by this Court. [3] Consequently, the criminal leave to appeal fails being devoid of merit and the same is hereby dismissed. (K.S. RATHORE),J. /KKC/