HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
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).
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.
For Appellant(s) : Mr.Bharat Singh.
For Respondent(s) : Mr.L.R.Upadhyay, P.P.
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Judgment / Order
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)
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.