Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2107 of 2003 Revisionist :- Smt. Jagwati Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Raj Kumar Khanna Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard Sri Raj Kumar Khanna, learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This criminal revision has been preferred against judgment and order dated 14.5.2003, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 10, Moradabad in Sessions Trial No. 290 of 2002, acquitting the opposite party Nos. 2 to 5 for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 323/34, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(X) SC/ST Act.
As per prosecution story, a First Information Report was lodged by complainant-Smt. Jagwati on 29.6.2001 alleging therein that on 21.6.2001 at about 6 P.M. when she was sitting in baramda of her house along with neighbours Manju Sharma and Smt. Saubhagyawati, all of sudden opposite party nos. 2 to 5, namely Wahid, Chhiddan, Rahis and Smt. Roshan Jahan came there and assaulted her. The complainant has not received any injury in the alleged incident.
A case was registered and after investigation charge sheet was submitted. Charges were framed and prosecution in support of its case examined PW-1 Smt. Jagwati, PW-2 Om Prakash, PW-3 Santosh Kumar and PW-4 K.K. Gautam (Investigating Officer).
Statements of accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and after hearing learned counsel for both the parties accused were acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 323/34, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(X) SC/ST Act. Hence, this revision.
Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the impugned order is illegal, perverse and against the evidence available on record.
Learned A.G.A. submitted that there is no illegality, impropriety, material irregularity or jurisdictional error in the order impugned, hence the revision is liable to be dismissed.
From the perusal of record, it appears that opposite party Nos. 2 to 5 were acquitted mainly on the ground that there is delay of about eight days in lodging the FIR; there is material contradictions in the statements of prosecution witnesses; though it has been stated by complainant Smt. Jagwati as well as by PW-2 Om Prakash, who claimed to be an eyewitness, that opposite party Nos. 2 to 5 have assaulted the complainant with kicks and fists, but in support of this submission no medical examination report was brought on record.
In such circumstances, this Court finds no illegality, impropriety, material irregularity or jurisdictional error in the impugned order. No interference is called for. The present revision lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed.
The revision is accordingly dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
Order Date :- 13.9.2018 NS