lu':iMfs:' j;;!|m{;S |;;.;|::!|C 1010 JP ],^;|...j;-j 131&I !•".: lxl'510 jfflpjs |oJ5| iigjo isiijs ls?al-'"a ;|o|"n l-o jM |;nj:g| 10i''5l 16 !m! iiafcl l.?|;z;| |"jo| •IFiil t"^L',,IF' i^ l"f'l" jmie': i^ E^ !"::•'ia K' |fl i<£:i?B r^I O 'Xi :33 O > 'TI ui' 2.. n" " s? !i) »•=•• ° o 'S s (I? il,. i" '"^- 'o fl) (/? m =: »»;- B) o ".' iu' g; g" S E~ '») <10 O *d -^ <" ? °'. 3. :!i w ,-.-, :3 m o .& u' 'O rn >» 3- ° ;-r, u^ '-3 < ••.:-• ^ ^-'•} W G> 7ri '^" ':1-' ^. as .:'' ;S i- B' "' " ' »: ^S. .t° g r\"t E)^5! ^ (& ° 1 ^ ili9<ill t[> ^ H1GH COURT^FCHHAmSG&RH AT BIIASPUR SBl^HON^LEMR.JUSTICBPRITIBKBR.mWAKBR Aca.A.^|0^3SZ2099 APPLICAJST State ofCbIiattisRarh Versus RE8PONDENT Parasram Shri Piaveen Das, Dy.G.A. for the appellaat. None for fhe respondent. Despite of issuaace of SPC and bauable warrant aone appears for fhe respondent/accused, Shri Suresh Venna, Advocate, who is ia the paael of H%h Court Legal Services Authority, is appointed as counsel to represent the respondent in fhis case. APPLICATION UNDER SECTIOB 378(3t OF THB Cr.P.C, FOR GRANT OF LBAVS Ss MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNDER SBCTION 378E1S OF TKE CR.P.C. O RD S R Heard on admission. The present petition filed under Section 378(3) is directed agarast fhe impugned judginent dated 29.08.2003 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bem.etara, Dista-ict Durg iu Cr.Case No. 90/2001 wbereby the accused/respondents have been acquitted of fhe offence underSections 279,337 & 338 ofthe IPC. 2. Case of the prosecution iu brief is that on 31.5.98 PIR Ex.P/10 was lodged by one Oiukar Prasad P.W.-6 alleging ia it that a day before fhereto, i.e. on 30.5.98 at about 8.30 p.in. when hp along with P.W.-l Saatosli Bairagi was gpms on his bicycle, fhe accused who was the driver of fhe nuxiibus bearing registration N0. MP 24 C 2618 came froin behirid driviag rashly and neglucnUy and dashed the same causiag idjuries to him as weU as Santosh Bairagi, i€t^ 3. In support of its case, thc prosecution has examined as inany as eight witnesses. Statement of fhe accused was also recoided under Section 313 Cr.P.C. ia which he denied the charges leveled against him aad pleaded innocence aad false implication ia flie case. 4. Contention of fh.e coimsel for the State/appUcaat is fhat on the basis of inaterial available on record, fhe Court below ought to have convicted fhe accused/iBSpondent. 5. On the other hand Shri Suresh Verma, counsel for the respondent submits that fhe judgment impugned is ia accordaace with law. He further subnuts that ia an appeal against acquittal fhe findiag of fhe Courts below caxmot be reversed ualess the findiag is perverse. 6. I have heard counsel for fhe parties and perused the niaterial avaUable on record iacluding fbe judgiuent uiipugned. 7. P.W.-l Santosh wbo was the piUion rider ofthe bicycle has meiely stated that the bus was driven by the accused/respondent veiy speedily however be had not stated fhat flie vehicle ia question was drivea rashly aad negUgently. Likewise P.W.-6 Oiukar Prasad the iiijiu-ed who was dnvuig the bicycle has notstated that the vetucle was driven by the applicant rashly or negUgently. 8. After due appreciation of the evidence, the Court below has anived to a conclusion of acqiutting the accused person. 9. Thus after hearing counsel for the parties and considerina fhe inaterial avaflable on record as weU as fhe elaborate judgnient unpugned passed by fhe Court below and being veiy inuch coascious of the existing legal position that ia aii appeal against acqiuttal if two views aze possible on the basis of fh.e evidence led by the prosecution aad the trial Coiut taking one view favoured the accused, reversion F?r '"""^ /1,:. •>, Sfc^..:. 1 'i, "i%s?J .^. lssa of fhe fiitdiags of acquittal by the appeBaat Coiirt talang the other possible view iato consideration, is not permissible ia law, fhis Court is of the view that the judgmcnt impugned acquitting ftie respondeut/accused of the offence under Sections 279,337 & 338 of fhe Indian Penal Code, is just and proper aad does not warraut any m.terference by fhis Court. Accordingly, the appeal fafls and is disinissed as such. - ~ -- Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker