? &: HI^COURTOFCHHATriSeARHATI D|VIS!fiNBJiNJ;H CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJIEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SKRI SUNK. KUMfiK SiNHA, J. M,Cr,C.(PR) No.2783 of 2085 State of Chhattisgarh, through : PS Civil Lins, Bilaspur (CG) Kumar aged about 22 years, Accused 0?-! 0!*»*A«YiA(.tn..4A.f t ^,1,, si.-t \ms &'o snyamsuneiei' Lanare, R/o Viii Lokhandi, PS Sarkanda, Biiaspur (CG) 2 Bhoom Kumari Wd/o— Aoed about 26 yssrs, Dhuripara Msngs!a, PS Civil Lines, Bilaspur, Tahstl and DistricS Biiaspur (CG) Present : Shri A il Mishra, Deputy Government Advocate for the StaSe/petifioner. (9th The foHowing order of the Court was passed by Shri Akhit Mishra, iearned Deputy Government Advocate for the petitioner / State is heard on the question of grant of teave to the acquittal of respondents/aecused persons and Bhoom Kumari vide impugned Judgment dated ion of the to un-natural/ 18.05.2005 passed in Sessions Trial No.34/20W. 2) Police Civil Line, Bilaspur after investigation of the case registered in regard *S9 homicidal death of Jagmohani @ Deepak charge-sheeted respondents/accused persons Mukesh Kumar and Bhoom Kumari for the alleged commission of the offences punishable under Sections 302, 328 and 201 of the indian Penal Code on the accusation of their having committed murder of deceased Jagmohani @ Deepak in the intervening night of 28 and 29th June, 2004. 3) The respondents/accused persons abjured their guilt and pleaded false imptication to the charges framed by the trial Court under Sections 3)2, 328 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. 4) The triat Court on a close scrutiny of the entire evidence led by the prosecution at the trial found that the evidence of solitary eyewltness PW/1 Yashwant, who was a child aged about 8 yeare was not reliable; the evidence of PW/3 Purushottam was of no help to the prosecution as he neither named the three persons he saw in the Cyde-rickshaw, nor he identified anyone of them as the accused persons; the evidence of PVV/2 Chaitram about the illfcit relationshlp between respondent No.1 Mukesh Kumar and respondent No.2 Bhoom Kumari was not reliable as there were material omissions in his case-diary statement. On the above flndings, the trial Court acquitted respondents/accused persons Mukesh Kumar and Bhoom Kumari vide impugned judgment dated 18.05.2005. 5) Shri Akhil Mishra, learned Deputy Govemment Advocate vehemently argued that the trial Court has erred in discarding the evidence of soiitary eyewitness PW/1 Yashwant whlch was ampty f fi. '! '•• 1 ''tej^ 't k. "T . •*N. t--:'"'^? ^t. corroborated by the evidence of PW/2 Chaitram and Purushottam. 6) The body of deceased Jagmohani @ Deepak was found iying in a graveyard in the clty of Bilaspur near his C)rcle-rickshaw. Though the incident is said to have taken place In the intervening night of 28th and 29th June, 2004, the case diary ^atement of solitary eyewitness PW/1 Yashwant was recorded by the Police after about 70 days on 07.09.2804. Though solitary eyewitness R/V/1 Yashwant's version is to the effect that the two accused persons throttled his father deceased Jagmohani @ Deepak by means of a small iron pipe, the medical evidence does not estabtish that the deceased died on account of throttling. The prosecution case at the trial was that the deceased died on account of poisoning and poison (Endosutpha) was administered by the respondents / accused persons, but there was no direct evidence led before the trial Court to establish that any of the two accused peraons administered Endosulpha polson to the deceased. The evidence of PW/3 Purushottam is of not much Incriminating value as though he claims to have seen two male and one female in the Cycie-rickshaw, he neither named anyofthe three persons nor he identified the respondents / accused persons as two among those three persons, who were seen by him in the Cycle-rickshaw. Mere alleged seizure of a can of Endosulpha poison at the instance of respondent No.1 Mukesh Kumar after about four months of the incident, even If believed, will not by itsetf be sufficient to hold the ^^i^^^^^e^';ss:s:SSK respondents / accused persons guilty on the capital charge of murder. 7) On due consideration of ithe submissions of leamed Deputy ''''> Govemment Advocate; the t'lndings recorded by the triat Court teading to the acquittal of respondents / accused persons; and the above mentioned broad features of the case, we are satisfied that the findings recorded by the trial Court leading to the acquittal of the respondents/accused persons do not suffer from any infirmity whatsoever. 8) Mere possibillty of another vlew on the prosecution evidence will not by 'rtself be a sufficient ground for interference in an appeal againsit acquittal. 9) We, therefore, do not find any good ground for grant of leave to appeal against the acquittal of respondents / accused persons Mukesh Kumar and Bhoom Kumari. 10) The petltion fited bythe petitioner/State under Sectton 378(3) of the Cr.P.C., therefore, fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge subbu w^, w