State vs Kishan Lal @ Madan & Anr on 5 September, 2017

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Crml Leave To Appeal No. 338 / 2015
State of Rajasthan.

—-Appellant
Versus

1. Kishan Lal @ Madan Lal son of Devi Lal, by caste Gameti,
resident of Bheel Basti, Nogama, Police Station Rajnagar,
District Rajsamand.

2. Devi Lal son of Shobha, by caste Gameti, resident of Bheel
Basti, Nogama, Police Station Rajnagar, District Rajsamand.

—-Respondent
__
For Appellant(s) : Mr. L.R. Upadhyaya, PP.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. A.P. Singh.

__
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Judgment
05/09/2017

Heard the arguments advanced by the learned Public

Prosecutor and learned counsel representing the respondents

accused. Perused the impugned judgment as well as the record.

By way of the instant application preferred under Section

378(iii) (i) Cr.P.C., the State of Rajasthan craves leave to file an

appeal against the judgment dated 25.03.2015 passed by the

learned Sessions Judge, Rajsamand in Sessions Case No.67/2011

whereby, the respondents accused were acquitted from charges

under Sections 498A and 306 IPC.

Having heard and considered the arguments at bar and after

perusal of the record, I am of the firm opinion that there exist no

valid grounds or reasons so as to grant leave to the State of
(2 of 2)
[CRLLA-338/2015]

Rajasthan to file an appeal against the impugned judgment of

acquittal. As per the prosecution case, the deceased Geeta was

married to Kishan Lal accused about 8-9 years before the incident.

She jumped into a well with her son Guddu on 10.12.2010 and

both expired by drowning. Her parents were informed. The

deadbodies were subjected to postmortem and were handed over

to the matrimonial relatives for cremation. The FIR came to be

lodged as late as on 20.12.2010 by Mangilal father of Geeta.

When the statement of Mangilal was recorded at the trial, apart

from a bald allegation that Geeta used to complain to him that her

husband quarreled with her, no aspersions were made so as to

justify the prosecution of the respondents for the offence under

Sections 498A and 306 IPC. Likewise, PW-6 Smt. Nani also made

vague allegations of beating against Kishan Lal and stated that

Kishan Lal used to commit thefts. However, these statements

clearly fall short of proving the necessary ingredients of the

offences alleged against the accused.

Thus, I am of the opinion that the impugned judgment of

acquittal dated 25.03.2015 does not suffer from any shortcoming,

either factual or legal, so as to grant leave to the State of

Rajasthan for filing an appeal there against.

Consequently, the instant leave to appeal application

preferred by the State of Rajasthan is hereby rejected being

devoid of merit.

Record be returned to the trial court.

(SANDEEP MEHTA)J.

Tikam/18

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *