Court No. - 61
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 2999 of 2001
Appellant :- State Of U.P. Respondent :- Chandra Pal & Others Counsel for Appellant :- R.P.Dubey
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
This Government Appeal under Section 378 Cr.P.C. alongwith an application for grant of leave to appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 15.6.2001 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahr in Criminal Case No. 717 of 2000, under Sections 323, 324, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Khanpur, District Bulandshahr, whereby the accused respondents have been acquitted for the offence punishable under the aforesaid sections.
Heard learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the judgment and order passed by the court below.
The prosecution case in brief is that on 20.7.1991 at 8.00 P.M. the accused-respondents entered in the house of complainant Chandrawati and caused injuries by their respective weapons Lathi, Danda and Farsa to Chandrawati, Chandra Prabha and Ravindra. They also abused and threatened to kill them. The F.I.R. was lodged against the accused-respondents and after registration of the case, they have been charge sheeted to face trial. The accused-respondents denied the charges and claimed to be tried.
The prosecution to prove its case only produced documentary evidence and none of the witnesses were produced before the trial court, therefore, acquittal order was passed due to non producing of the witnesses. The trial court has acquitted the accused-respondents on the ground that the case is pending since 1993 and after several opportunity, none of the witnesses were produced by the prosecution. The evidence was closed relying upon the judgment rendered by Apex Court in the case of Raj Deo Sharma Vs. State of Bihar, 1998 C. Cr. LR (SC) 385.
It is contended by learned A.G.A. that the learned trial court has not taken steps to procure the attendance of the prosecution witnesses and statements of the witnesses were not recorded by the trial court when they were present in the court on several dates. It is further contended that the trial court has not taken cognizance under Section 147 I.P.C. and has wrongly relied upon the judgment in the case of Raj Deo Sharma Vs. State of Bihar 1998 C. Cr. LR (SC) 385, which is not applicable in the present case, therefore, the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the trial court is illegal. It is next contended that the finding recorded by the trial court is totally wrong and against the principles of natural justice and the judgment and order passed by the trial court is erroneous.
On careful perusal of the judgment and order, it was found that the accused-respondents were present in the court and Presiding Officer had framed charge in the year 1993 which was refused by the accused-respondents and they prayed for trial. Even after lapse of eight years not a single witness was produced and ultimately, evidence was closed. Statements of accused-respondents were also recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which they have refused their involvement in the incident in question and they stated that due to village partybandi, they have been falsely implicated in the present case.
It is further contended that the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of "Common Cause" a Registered Society through its Director Vs. Union of India and others, 1996(33) SC 515, it has been held that when the witnesses are not available and the matter is pending since long, it should have been closed and the accused should have been discharged.
In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of "Common Cause" a Registered Society (supra), I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the judgment and order dated 15.6.2001 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahr as it is responsibility of the prosecution to produce the witnesses in the court and get their statements recorded.
Accordingly, the application seeking leave to appeal is rejected and consequently the appeal is dismissed.
Order Date :- 26.7.2018 Rmk.