Court No. - 51
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 1174 of 2014
Appellant :- State Of U.P. Respondent :- Manohar Lal And Anr. Counsel for Appellant :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ifaqat Ali Khan,J.
Heard Sri Rajesh Mishra, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State on the application seeking leave to appeal against the judgment and order dated 19.12.2013 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge court No. 1, Aligarh in Sessions Trial No. 679 of 2008 (State of U.P. vs. Manohar Lal and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 248 of 2007, by means of which, the accused-respondent, Manohar Lal has been acquitted of the offences under Ssections 363, 366 and 376 IPC and accused- respondent, Smt. Sunita has also been acquitted of the offence under Section 366/34 IPC.
We have heard Sri Rajesh Mishra at great length. We also gone through the finding as has been recorded by the court concerned while returning the verdict of acquittal. Keeping in view the contention as has been raised at the bar to this Court as well as the grounds taken in the memo of appeal. We have perused the record and the findings as recorded by the trial court.
The victim in the present case has been examined as PW-2. The victim categorically in her statement says that while she was being taken away by the accused persons she had met Nanhu and Devraj and she had also told that she is being taken away forcibly. However, neither any hue and cry was raised nor Nanhu and Devraj made any attempt to protect the girl. It has further come on record that as per medical examination report and the report of the CMO concerned, the age of the victim was 19 years and above. The court has further observed that the conduct of the victim herself is highly disturbing and is not beyond doubt and is not a bona fide conduct. She herself admits that she has accompanied the accused persons in a bus which was full of people, however, she raised no hue and cry nor sought any help. It is also come on record that she along with accused had taken the room on rent at Mathura, where she stayed for two months and where again she raised no hue and cry. The relevant findings are being extracted hereinbelow:-
vfHk;ksD=h ih0 MCyw0 2 us vius c;ku esa ;g crk;k gS fd ?kVuk okys fnu esa ?kj ij vdsyh FkhA eq>s lquhrk cqykus vk;h FkhA lquhrk eq>s vius ?kj cqykdj ys x;h] ogka euksgj mifLFkr FkkA lquhrk us dgk fd rw euksgj ds lkFk pyh tk] rq>s vPNs diMs+ o lksus pkWnh ds tsoj iguk;sxkA eaSus euk fd;k] blds ckn lquhrk o euksgj us eq>s dsyk f[kyk fn;k] dsyk [kkus ds ckn eaS csgks'k fLFkfr esa gks x;hA euksgj eq>s xksih xkao dh rjQ ys x;k] ogka bZ[k ds [ksr FksA ml le; bZ[k vkneh ds cjkcj FkhA xksih ds ikl eq>s nsojkt o uUuw feys FksA bu nksuksa ls eaSus dgk Fkk fd ;g eq>s tcjnLrh ys tk jgk gS] euksgj us eq>ls dgk fd vxj rwus dqN dgk rks eaS rsjs firk HkkbZ o rq>s ekj nwaxkA euksgj us eq>s bZ[k ds [ksr esa ,d jkr j[kk FkkA esjs lkFk cqjk dke cykRdkj fd;k FkkA mlus ;g lEHkksx esjh ethZ ds fo:) esjs lkFk fd;k Fkk bZ[k ds [ksr ds ckn euksgj eq>s fldUnjkjkÅ VsEiks ls ys x;k Fkk vkSj fQj cl } kjk eFkqjk ys x;k FkkA eFkqjk esa euksgj us ,d dejk fdjk;s ij fy;k Fkk ogka ge nks ekg jgs FksA ogkW Hkh euksgj us esjs lkFk tcjnLrh lEHkksx djrk FkkA izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ esa vfHk;ksD=h dh vk;q 15 o"kZ crk;h x;h gS U;k;ky; esa eqUuk yky ih0 MCyw0 1 us vius c;ku esa vfHk;ksD=h dh vk;q 15 o"kZ crk;h gS viuh izfrijh{kk esa lk{kh us dgk fd mldh 'kknh dks 20&22 o"kZ gks x;s gS] mlds 6 cPps gSA lk{kh dk dFku gS fd vfHk;ksD=h 'kknh ds fdrus le; ckn iSnk gqbZ] ;g ugh crk ldrk gSA mldh dksbZ yMdh i<h fy[kh ugha gSA bl izdkj lk{kh ds c;ku ds vfrfjDr vfHk;ksD=h dh vk;q ds lEcU/k esa dksbZ izys[kh; lk{; i=koyh ij ugh gSA vfHk;ksD=h dk fpfdRlh; ijh{k.k fnukad 10-06- 07 dks Mk0 dkfeuh vxzoky ih0 MCyw 3 }kjk fd;k x;k FkkA fpfdRld dh jk; ij vfHk;ksD=h dk ,Dl&js ijh{k.k djk;k x;kA ,Dl&js ijh{k.k fjiksVZ izn'kZ d&4 dks lk{kh }kjk lkfcr fd;k x;k gS vkSj fpfdRlh; ijh{k.k fjiksVZ@,Dl&js fjiksVZ ds vk/kkj ij lk{kh us ;g fu"d"kZ fn;k gS vfHk;ksD=h dh vk;q 19 lky ls mij FkhA i=koyh ij bl fpfdRlh; lk{; ds fojks/k esa dksbZ vU; fo'oluh; lk{; i=koyh ij ugh gS vkSj bl lk{; ds vk/kkj ij ?kVuk ds le; vfHk;ksD=h dh vk;q 19 o"kZ ls mij Fkh vkSj og Li"V :i ls o;Ld FkhA vfHk;ksD=h ih0 MCyw0 2 us viuh eq[; ijh{kk esa viuh ethZ ds f[kykQ lEHkksx djus dk dFku fd;k gSA izfrijh{kk esa fd;s x;s dFkuksa ds vk/kkj ij ;g izdV gksrk gS fd vfHk;ksD=h ds ikl vfHk;qDr ds ikl ls pys tkus dk i;kZIr volj Fkk rFkk vfHk;qDr ds lkFk eFkqjk esa jgus ds nkSjku Hkh mlds ikl i;kZIr volj vU; O;fDr;ksa dks crk nsus rFkk vfHk;qDr ds ikl ls pys tkus FkkA ijUrq blds ckotwn Hkh og vfHk;qDr ds lkFk jgrh jgh tks vfHk;qDr ds lkFk lgefr ls jguk izdV djrk gSA lk{kh us crk;k fd ?kj ls cqykus ds ckn ftl bZ[k ds [ksr es j[kk Fkk og esjs xkao ls 3 fd0 eh0 nwj gSA euksgj [kkuk xksih xkao ysdj vkrk FkkA nksuksa lkFk lkFk [kkuk [kkrs FksA euksgj xksih ls esjs fy, diMs ysdj Hkh vk;k FkkA xksih tc [kkuk ysus tkrk Fkk rc og vk/kk ,d ?k.Vk ckn ykSVdj vkrk FkkA lk{kh ds c;ku ls izdV gS fd euksgj ds [kkuk ysus tkrs le; vfHk;ksD=h bZ[k ds [ksr esa vdsyh jgrh Fkh vkSj ogka ls pys tkusdk mlds ikl i;kZIr volj FkkA vfHk;ksD=h dk ;g dFku fd euksgj tkrs le; 2&3 vknfe;ksa dks j[kokyh ds fy, NksM tkrk Fkk] ckn esa lksp le> dj fd;k x;k ifjorZu izdV gksrk gSA blds iwoZ vfHk;ksD=h us 2&3 vknfe;ks ds }kjk j[kokyh djus ds ckjs esa ugh crk;k gSA vkxs lk{kh us ;g dFku fd;k gS fd ?kVuk ds le; BUMk ekSle FkkA dEcy o fcLrj Hkh gekjs ikl FkkA dEcy Hkh esjs lkeus [kjhnk vkSj pknj Hkh esjs lkeus [kjhnh FkhA mlh pknj o dEcy esa ge nksuksa lksrs FksA bZ[k ds [ksr ls fudy dj ge xksih ij vk;s FksA xksih ls fldUnjkjkÅ ge cl esa cSBs Fks] cl es 2&4 vkneh vkSj cSBs FksA fldUnjkjkÅ ge 1&2 ?k.Vk :ds FksA ge nwdkuksa ij [kMs jgs Fks] nwdku ij vkneh cSBs FksA ogka ls ge eFkqjk jksMost dh cl ls x;s FksA cl esa 30&40 lokfj;ka FkhA eFkqjk cl LVS.M ij mrjs FksA cl LVS.M ij cgqr lokfj;ka FkhA eFkqjk cl LVSUM ls ge dejk ns[kus fjD'kk esa cSBdj x;s FksA geus dejk 300@& :i;k izfrekg fdjk;s ij fy;k Fkk fdjk;s dh ckr ftl vkneh ls dh Fkh ml edku esa vkneh ds cPps Fks o ,d YkMdh 'kknh ;ksX; FkhA mlds vkl ikl edku Fks mles vkneh jgrs FksA bl lk{kh dk dFku gS fd [kkus ds fy, crZu o lkeku diMk+ cktkj ls lkFk lkFk ysus x;s FksA ,d nks ?k.Vk cktkj esa yx x;k FkkA cktkj dejs ls 2 fd0 eh0 nwj FkkA dejk ls cktkj iSny x;s Fks ;gka ge nks ekg :ds FksA ge nks ekg dejs es gh jgs Fks] ckgj ugh fudys FksA eaSus edku ekfyd o vkSj yksxksa ls dqN ugh dgk FkkA vfHk;ksD=h ds mijksDr dFkuksa ls ;g izdV gS fd xksih xkao ls eFkqjk tkrs le; vfHk;ksD=h us vfHk;qDr ds lkFk cl o VsEiks esa ;k=k dh ftuesa vU; lokfj;ka mifLFkr FkhA vfHk;ksD=h o vfHk;qDr us lkFk lkFk eFkqjk esa dejk fdjk;s ij fy;k vkSj lkFk lkFk x`gLFkh dk lkeku crZu diM+k vkfn cktkj ls [kjhnk rFkk nksuksa lkFk lkFk ,d dejs esa nks ekg rd jgs gSA Lo;ae~ vfHk;ksD=h ds vuqlkj edku ekfyd ds cPps o yMdh 'kknh ds ;ksX; Fkh ;fn vfHk;qDr us vfHk;ksD=h dks tcjnLrh vius lkFk j[kk gqvk Fkk rks vfHk;ksD=h ds ikl mu O;fDr;ksa ls dgus dk i;kZIr volj Fkk ijUrq vfHk;ksD=h us vius c;ku esa dgk gS fd mlus Hk;oa'k mu O;fDr;ks ls ugha dgk FkkA vfHk;ksD=h us ,slk dksbZ dFku ugh fd;k gS fd euksgj }kjk nks ekg dh vof/k esa yxkrkj fdl izdkj mls Hk;Hkhr fd;k x;k FkkA vfHk;ksD=h ds c;ku ls ;g Hkh izdV gksrk gS fd og mDr Ikj vdsyh Hkh jgh vkSj vdsys jgrs le; Hk; dk dksbZ dkj.k izdV ugh gksrk gS vkSj lHkh ifjfLFkfr;ka izdV djrh gS fd vfHk;qDr ds lkFk jgus esa vfHk;ksD=h dh lgefr FkhA lgefr dks rF; bl ckr ls Hkh izdV gksrk gS fd vfHk;ksD=h o vfHk;qDr ,d gh xkao ds ikl ikl jgus okys gS vkSj vfHk;qDr euksgj yky ?kVuk ds iwoZ Hkh vfHk;ksD=h ds ?kj vkrk tkrk FkkA fu.kZ; ds mij dh x;h foospuk ds vuqlkj ?kVuk ds le; vfHk;ksD=h 19 o"kZ dh o;Ld L=h Fkh vkSj viuh lgefr nsus esa l{ke Fkh vkSj i=koyh es miyC/k lk{; ls vfHk;ksD+=h dh lgefr vfHk;qDr ds lkFk jgus esa izdV gksrh gSA With regard to the place of occurrence where the girl was recovered following findings have been given:-
orZeku ekeys esa vfHk;ksD=h o vfHk;qDr ds cjkenxh ds LFkku dks ysdj Hkh egRoiw.kZ fojk/kkHkkl gSA vfHk;kstu dh vksj ls ijhf{kr lHkh lkf{k;ksa us vius c;ku esa vfHk;ksD=h dks vfHk;qDr euksgj ds lkFk eFkqjk ls cjken djus dk dFku fd;k gSA vfHk;ksD=h ih0 MCyw0 2 us vius c;ku esa crk;k gS fd eFkqjk jgus ds nkSjku iqfyl igqap x;h Fkh vkSj iqfyl euksgj ds lkFk Fkkuk vdjkckn ysdj vk;h FkhA viuh izfrijh{kk esa lk{kh us dgk gS fd iqfyl eFkqjk okys edku ls yk;h Fkh vkSj ;g dguk xyr gS fd iqfyl us eq>s o euksgj dks ukum ls idMk gksA vfHk;kstu ds vuqlkj vfHk;ksD=h o euksgj yky dk ukum iqy frjkgs ls 10-06-07 ls cjken fd;k x;k FkkA bu ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa vfHk;qDr ds ikl ls vfHk;ksD=h ds cjkenxh ds LFkku dks ysdj egRoiw.kZ fojks/kkHkkl gSA vfHk;qDrx.k ds fo}ku vf/koDrk dh vksj ls ;g rdZ Hkh izLrqr fd;k x;k gS fd orZeku ekeys dh izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ vR;Ur foyEc ls fy[kk;h x;h gSA ?kVuk fnukad 12-03-07 ds lka; 3 cts dh gS tc fd izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ fn0 27- 05-07 dks 3-35 ctsa vafdr djk;h x;h gSA fo}ku vf/koDrk dk dFku gS fd fjiksVZ ds vuqlkj uUuw o nsojkt us ?kVuk okys fnu oknh dks crk fn;k Fkk fd mUgksus vfHk;ksD=h dks euksgj ds lkFk tkrs gq, ns[kk FkkA ,slh fLFkfr esa oknh }kjk ihfMrk dks ryk'k djus dk dksbZ vkSfpR; ugh Fkk vkSj vfHk;qDr dks ckn esa uketn dj fn;k x;k gSA Thus the court has clearly concluded herein as under:-
lsDl ls lEcfU/kr vijk/kksa eas ekuuh; U;k;ky; }kjk vo/kkfjr mijksDr fcUnq dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq, Hkh orZeku ekeys esa fLFkfr fHkUu izdV gksrh gSA izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ esa mYyf[kr O;fDr;ksa ds }kjk oknh dks ?kVuk dh frfFk dks gh vfHk;ksD=h ds vfHk;qDr euksgjyky ds lkFk tkus ds ckjs es crk fn;k x;k Fkk rc vfHk;ksD=h dks fj'rsnkfj;ksa esa ryk'k djus dk dksbZ vkSfpR; ugh FkkA blds vfrfjDr oknh eqUukyky us vius c;ku esa ;g dFku fd;k gS fd mlus ?kVuk dh fjiksVZ nks ekg ckn }kjk ofj"B iqfyl v/kh{kd ntZ djk;h Fkh vkSj mlls igys dksbZ rgjhj Fkkus ij ugh nh FkhA bu ijhfLFkfr;ksa esa izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ foyEc ls ntZ djk;k tkuk gh izdV gksrk gSA ;|fi orZeku ekeys esa fu.kZ; esa mij lk{; dh] dh x;h foospuk ds vk/kkj ij foyEc dk izHkko izdV ugh gksrk gS D;ksfd vfHk;ksD=h dk lk{; bl vk'k; dk ugh gS fd ml ij fo'okl izdV fd;k tk lds vkSj vfHk;ksD=h }kjk fd;s x;s dFkuksa ls vfHk;ksD=h dh lgefr vfHk;qDr ds lkFk tkus o lalxZ fd;s tkus esa izdV gksrh gSA vfHk;ksD=h 19 o"kZdh o;Ld Fkh vkSj lgefr nsus esa l{ke Fkh vkSj ,slh fLFkfr esa vfHk;qDrx.k ds fo:) yxk;s x;s vkjksi lUnsg ls ijs lkfcr ugh gSA i=koyh ij miyC/k lk{; dh mij dh x;h foospuk ds vk/kkj ij vfHk;kstu i{k vfHk;qDrx.k ds fo:) vkjksi lUnsg ls ijs lkfcr djus esa vlQy jgk gS] vr% vfHk;qDrx.k vkjksfir vkjksi ls nks"keqDr fd;s tkus ;ksX; gSA Reference may be made to the recent judgment of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Bannareddy & Ors. vs. The State of Karnataka & Ors reported in 2018 (5) SCC 790 wherein the Apex Court has held as under:
“11. Before we proceed further to peruse the finding of the High Court, it is relevant to discuss the power and jurisdiction of the High Court while interfering in an appeal against acquittal. It is well settled principle of law that the High Court should not interfere in the well reasoned order of the trial court which has been arrived at after proper appreciation of the evidence. The High Court should give due regard to the findings and the conclusions reached by the trial court unless strong and compelling reasons exist in the evidence itself which can dislodge the findings itself. This principle has further been elucidated in the case of Sambhaji Hindurao Deshmukh and Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra, (2008) 11 SCC 186, para 13, wherein this Court observed that: "The High Court will interfere in appeals against acquittals, only where the trial court makes wrong assumptions of material facts or fails to appreciate the evidence properly. If two views are reasonably possible from the evidence on record, one favouring the accused and one against the accused, the High Court is not expected to reverse the acquittal merely because it would have taken the view against the accused had it tried the case. The very fact that two views are possible makes it clear that the prosecution has not proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and consequently the accused is entitled to benefit of doubt.
12. It is not in dispute that the presumption of innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened against the acquitted accused by the judgment in his favor. [Vide Rabindra Kumar Pal @ Dara Singh vs. Republic of India, (2011) 2 SCC 490 in para. 94].
27.Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, we hold that the prosecution was not able to establish the guilt of the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. Further, the High Court should not have re-appreciated evidences in its entirety, especially when there existed no grave infirmity in the findings of the trial court. There exists no justification behind setting aside the order of acquittal passed by the trial court, especially when the prosecution case suffers from several contradictions and infirmities. No specific assertion could be proved regarding the role and involvement of the accused persons. Further, certain actions of the victim-respondents themselves are dubious, for instance admitting themselves later in a Multi- speciality hospital without proper cause. It has further come to our notice that respondents have already compromised and have executed a compromise deed to that extent, though the same is not the basis for our conclusion.”
Reference may also be made to the judgments of the Apex Court rendered in the cases of Sanmwat Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 1961 SC 715, Murlidhar @ Gidda & Anr. Vs. State of Karnataka decided on 09.04.2014 in Criminal Appeal No. 791 of 2011, Basappa Vs. State of Karnataka decided on 27.02.2014 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 512 of 2014, Ashok Rai Vs. State of U.P. & Ors. decided on 15.04.2014 in Criminal Appeal No. 1508 of 2005, Ramesh Harijan vs. State of U.P. 2012 AIR SCW 2990 and Murugesan v. State through Inspector of Police reported in 2012 AIR SCW 5627.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that the view taken by the Court below is not possible and plausible thus the judgment of the court below cannot be interfered with by this Court only on account of the fact that another view is possible.
Learned A.G.A. has not been able to point out any illegality or perversity with the findings as recorded by the court below and thus it cannot be said that the view taken by trial court is a perverse view.
Thus in view of aforesaid consistent legal position as elaborated above and also in view of the fact that learned A.G.A. has failed to point out any illegality or perversity with the findings so recorded in the impugned order, no case for interference has been made out. No interference with the impugned judgment and order of acquittal is warranted. Accordingly the application seeking leave to appeal is rejected. Consequently, appeal is also dismissed.
Let a copy of this order be certified to the court concerned for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 17.9.2018 Sumaira