Rubi Bano @ Babi vs State & Ors on 10 October, 2017

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Crml Leave To Appeal No. 458 / 2017
Rubi Bano Alias Babi W/o Yusuf Shah, D/o Hasan Ali, By Caste
Musalman, Resident of Amarsinghpura, Ward No. 27, Bikaner. At
Present Ward No. 9 Rajgarh, District-Churu (Rajasthan).
—-Appellant
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan

2. Yusuf Shah S/o Shri Sahanaj Shah

3. Mohd. Shah S/o Sahanaj Shah

4. Kishmat Bano W/o Sahanaj Shah, All by Caste Musalman,
Resident of Amarsinghpura, Ward No. 27, Bikaner.
—-Respondents
__
For Appellant(s) : Mr.Bharat Singh.
For Respondent(s) : Mr.L.R.Upadhyay, P.P.
__
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Judgment / Order
10/10/2017

The instant application for grant of leave to appeal has been

preferred on behalf of the applicant complainant craving leave to

file an appeal against the judgment dated 26.8.2011 passed by

the learned ACJM, Rajgarh in Cr.Regular Case No.294/2009

whereby, the respondents were acquitted from the charges for the

offences under Sections 498A and 406 I.P.C.

I have heard and appreciated the arguments advanced by

the learned counsel representing the applicant and have gone

through the impugned judgment.

Ex-facie, I am duly satisfied that the trial Judge was perfectly
(2 of 2)
[CRLLA-458/2017]

justified in acquitting the respondents from the charges. The

applicant herein was married to the respondent Yusuf Shah in the

year 2004. She lived with the respondent till the year 2005 and it

is stated that the husband left her at her father’s house in Rajgarh

Town on 18.6.2005. Thereafter, nobody from her maternal

relatives came to take care of her. The F.I.R. came to be lodged on

24.3.2009 i.e. after nearly 5 years of the applicant being deserted

by the husband. On a perusal of the impugned judgment, it is

apparent that in the meantime, the husband filed a suit for

declaration in the competent court seeking a direction that his wife

be directed to live with him with his daughter. Process of the said

suit was served on the complainant whereafter, the complaint

came to be filed.

In this background, it is apparent that the proceedings of the

complaint filed by the complainant against the respondents were

virtually time barred as the same were initiated beyond the period

of three years. No plausible explanation was offered by the

applicant for the huge delay in filing of the F.I.R.

As a consequence, I find no reason to grant leave to the

applicant to file appeal against the impugned judgment of

acquittal. Hence, the leave to appeal application is rejected as

being devoid of merit.

(SANDEEP MEHTA),J.

/tarun goyal/

Leave a Comment

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