!! 1 !! IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S.B. CRIMNAL LEAVE TO APPEAL NO.124/2009 (State of Rajasthan Vs. Raja Ram) Date of order :: 30.04.2009 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr.O.P. Singaria, Public Prosecutor. Heard learned Public Prosecutor. In this criminal leave to appeal filed under Section 378 (iii) Cr.P.C., the State Government is challenging the judgment dated 18th April, 2006 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nohar in Criminal Case No.169/2005, whereby, the learned Judge has acquitted non- petitioner Raja Ram for the charges under Sections 341, 323 and 325 IPC. !! 2 !! According to the facts of the case, an FIR was filed by one Shri Bhagwana Ram on 11th April, 2005 at 2.30 PM stating that Rajaram, Railway contractor came upon site of the occurrence in a tractor with his labourers and threatened him that how you have courage to refuse my labourers to give utensils, and became angry and assaulted Bhagwana Ram. It is stated in the FIR that Rajaram started beating Bhagwanara Ram by fist and kicks and after receiving injuries, he became unconscious, then some persons came to rescue him and thereafter contractor went away from the site of occurrence. Upon this report, an FIR under Sections 341, 323 and 325 IPC was registered and after investigation charge-sheet was filed before the trial court. After filing charge-sheet, the trail court framed charges against the accused person under Sections 341, 323 and 325 IPC and thereafter trial was commenced. From the side of prosecution, five witnesses were produced namely PW-1 Dr.Jaspal, PW- 2 Rajeram, PW-3 Bhagirath, PW-4 Bhagwanaram and PW-5 Kedar Lal, so also, five documents were exhibited. Thereafter, the statement under Section !! 3 !! 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded and no witnesses were produced from the defence side. The learned trial court after considering entire evidence available on record, acquitted the non-petitioner while holding that prosecution has not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against the non-petitioner. I have perused the judgment dated 18th April, 2006 passed by the learned trial court. In para 8 of the judgment, it is specifically discussed by the trial court that the prosecution story is not corroborated by PW-1 Dr.Jaspal, so also, there is no explanation with regard to delay in filing FIR after four days. In my opinion, when FIR itself has been filed after four days of occurrence, so also, PW-1 Dr.Jaspal is not corroborating the story of prosecution with regard to occurrence, then learned trial court has rightly arrived at with the finding that prosecution has not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. In this view of the matter, the finding !! 4 !! arrived at by the trial court does not require any interference. Hence, this criminal leave to appeal is dismissed. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. A.K. Chouhan/- A.K. Chouhan/-