^:^ ;^ 1 -»"^^^s . ?i ^ >.. ^^v fvr^A llU^0^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (Division Bench) Coram: Hon'ble Shri T.P. Sharma & Hon'ble Shri R.N. Chandrakar. JJ. Acauittal AppealfPR) No. 865 of 2011 Appellant Smt. Parwati Sidar, w/o. Shri Pratap Sidar, aged about 33 years, r/o. village Parsadakhurd, Police Station Sakti, Post Temar, District Janjgir-Champa (CG). Respondents Vs. 1. Rajendra Kumar Patel, s/o. Bundeshwar Patel, aged about 20 years. 2. Lorik Yadav, s/o. Bharat Lal Yadav, aged about 20 years. 3. Srimati Basanti Bai, w/o. late Mohan Lal Sidar, aged about 24 years. A!l are residents of village Parsadakhurd, P.S. Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa (CG). (Respondents No. 1 to 3 were accused before trial Court). 4. State of Chhattisgarh through Police Station Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa C.G. / (Prosecution) (Application for grant of leave to appeal under Section 372 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973)) Present: Mr. Rakesh Pandey, counsel for the appellant. Mr. Jameer Akhtar Lohani, Panel Lawyer for respondent No.4/ State. ORALJUDGMENT (Deliveredon 9-8-2011) ^^^\ .• p •^ Per T.P. Sharma. J. 1. Heard on admission. 2. Perused the impugned judgment of the trial Court. 3. By this acquittal appeal under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (forshort, "the Code"), appellant has challenged the legality and propriety of the judgment of acquittal dated 8-10- 2010 passed by learned Special Judge, Janjgir-Champa in Specjal Sessions Triaf No.63 of 2010, whereby and whereunder, learned Special Judge has acquitted respondents No.1 to 3 ofthe charges under Sections 302 & 120-B read with Section 34 of the IPC and under Section 3 (2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1 989. 4. Present appeal has been preferred after 53 days of its limitation. 5. Heard on I.A.No.1/2011, application for condonation of delay in filing the present appeal. 6. On due consideratioh, I.A.No.1/2011 is allowed. 7. Heard on admission. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the prosecution has collected sufficient material for drawing inference against the respondents No.1 to 3. The evidence of PW/1 Laxmi Prasad Sidar clearly goes toshow that respondent No.1 was having illicit relation with respondent No.3- Smt Basanti Bai i.e., wife of deceased which was motive for commission of murder of Mohan Lal Sidar and mobile of the deceased was recovered at the instance of respondent No.1. This evidence is sufficient to connect @ the respondents No.1 to 3 with the crime in question and undisputedly, death was homicidal in nature. 9. On the other hand, Shri Jameer Akhtar Lohani, appearing for respondent No.4/State firmly opposed the appeal. 10. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment impugned. 11. As per evidence of PW/1 Laxmi Prasad Sidar, respondent No.3 Smt Basanti Bai was having illicit retation with respondent No.1- Rajendra Kumar Patel and he had seen respondent No.1 in the house of respondent No.3 for sometime. Mobile was seized at the instance of respondent No.1, but as per para 41 of the impugned judgment, the same was not placed for identification. Prosecution has not collected other evidence to show that the seized mobile or sim was the same which was being used by the deceased. In absence of the aforesaid evidence, the court below has acquitted respondents No. 1 to 3 after giving benefit of doubt to them. 12. On a close scrutiny of the judgment, we do not find any illegality or jnfirmity in the impugned judgment. The impugned judgment is well founded and does not require any interference. Consequently, we do not find any case for admission and the same is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. Sd7- T.P. Sharma Judge Raju Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge