(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI) The present application is filed for leave to prefer appeal under Section 378(1)(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 seeking leave to prefer appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 28.2.2011 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amreli in Sessions Case No.79 of 2009. The learned Judge was pleased to acquit the accused under Section 235(1) of Criminal Procedure Code from the charge levelled against him for offence under Sections 489(a)(b) and
(c) and 120-B read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.
Learned APP made available for perusal the evidence of PW-1, Exhibit 30, evidence of PW-8, Exhibit 45, evidence of PW-9, Exhibit 46 and evidence of PW-10, Exhibit 48.
Learned APP vehemently submitted that learned Judge has committed error in not relying upon the evidence of prosecution witnesses more particularly, the aforesaid prosecution witnesses who happens to be police personnel and recording acquittal for the offence alleged against the accused.
We heard the learned APP at length. We also examined the judgment and order recorded by learned Additional Sessions Judge.
Taking into consideration paragraph No.19 of the judgment; wherein, the leaned Judge on appreciation of the evidence has recorded as many as 10 reasons for which the case of the prosecution cannot be accepted. In absence of any acceptable answer to any of these 10 reasons, this Court is of the opinion that learned Additional Sessions Judge has not committed any error in recording the acquittal.
Hence, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the judgment and order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge.
Hence, the application is rejected.
(RAVI R.TRIPATHI, J.) (PARESH UPADHYAY, J.) (ashish) Top