Court No. - 45
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 378 No. - 30 of 2018 Applicant :- Dillipat Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.
Criminal complaint no. 55 of 2017 was filed by the applicant against accused respondents no. 2 to 7 on 17.4.2017, wherein it was stated that on 09.04.2017 at around 8:00 pm when the applicant Dillipat was proceeding to the house of Brij Lal, to hear Ramayan, he was surrounded by the accused respondents who abused and threatened him for life. Since he reported the matter to the police, accused respondents got annoyed with him and therefore, due to aforesaid reasons on 11.4.2017 at around 6:00 pm. aforesaid accused respondents came to the house of the applicant and exhorted him and when the applicant came out from his house, accused respondents Ramsewak, Ashok and Bhagwat caught hold of him and accused Dharmendra put tamancha on his chest and accused Kallu took out Rs. 200/- from his shirt's pocket and accused Bataiya took out Rs. 500/- from his pant's pocket and threatened him for life if he made any complaint to anyone. He further stated that the incident was seen by villagers Ashok and Rameshwar.
It has been further stated that when he tried to report the matter to the police station, it was not entertained and therefore, the applicant sent a written complaint to SSP, and District Magistrate, Hamirpur but when no action was taken, he filed a criminal complaint before the Court. The applicant as P.W.-1 and the alleged eye witness Rameshwar P.W.-2 appeared before the court to prove the case.The accused respondent in the statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. stated that in fact applicant committed marpeet with accused respondent Bhagwat about which the accused respondent Bhagawat had lodged an FIR against them, in retaliation thereof the present case has been lodged against accused-respondents.
The court after scanning and analyzing the entire material evidence on record has observed that there is material contradiction in the statement of complainant and alleged eye witness Rameshwar PW. 2 and the court found that the allegations set up by the complainant are very doubtful. It is notable that applicant has not received any injury on his person and have failed to prove that Rs. 200/- and Rs. 500/- were snatched by the accused respondents from his shirt and pant respectively. Defence taken by the accused respondent is that the accused Bhagwat had lodged a report against the applicant and his family members which had not been denied and present complaint appears to be a counterblast to the FIR lodged by accused respondents. A perusal of the cross examination of the applicant shows that he had sought bail in the matter which was filed against him by the accused respondent no. 1, Bhagwat.
Thus, we find that the judgment of acquittal given by the court below is full of reasoning and is cogent, satisfactory and convincing and the learned counsel for the applicant has not been able to show us any such illegality or perversity in the judgement so as to call for interference in the present appeal.
In view of above, we declined to grant leave to appeal and accordingly, the application is rejected and so also the appeal.
Order Date :- 28.3.2018 Sanjeev