State Of Rajasthan vs Rohthash And Others

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 151 Raj/2
Judgement Date : 6 January, 2022

Rajasthan High Court
State Of Rajasthan vs Rohthash And Others on 6 January, 2022
Bench: Pankaj Bhandari, Chandra Kumar Songara
       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

           D.B. Criminal Leave To Appeal No. 132/2015

State Of Rajasthan through PP
                                                                   ----Appellant
                                      Versus
1. Rohthash S/o Soram, R/o Siroli Kala, Police Station Tijara,
District Alwar, Raj.
2. Roshan, S/o Soram, R/o Siroli Kala, Police Station Tijara,
District Alwar, Raj.
3. Bhallon, S/o Shri Ram, R/o Siroli Kala, Police Station Tijara,
District Alwar, Raj.
4. Baljeet, S/o Shri Ram, R/o Siroli Kala, Police Station Tijara,
District Alwar, Raj.
                                                      ----Accused/Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Javed Choudhary, Addl. Govt. Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Singh Shekhawat, through VC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA Order 06/01/2022

1. State has filed this Criminal Leave to Appeal against the judgment and order dated 15.12.2015 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Tijara, Alwar.

2. It is contended by learned Addl. Govt. Advocate that the trial Court has erred in acquitting the accused/respondents. Court has not appreciated the evidence of PW-2 Sampat who is also an injured witness.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the accused/respondents has opposed the criminal leave to appeal. It is contended that all the witnesses including wife of deceased has turned hostile. It is also (Downloaded on 07/01/2022 at 09:36:11 PM) (2 of 2) [CRLLA-132/2015] contended that PW-2 Sampat is not a reliable witness as he has alleged that Rohthash, Baljeet and Pappu gave lathi blow on the head of the deceased, whereas there is single injury caused to the deceased and deceased died after two and a half months of the incident.

4. We have considered the contentions.

5. Both the parties had submitted a compromise before the Court below and offence under Sections 323 & 341 IPC were compounded by the Court below. Evidence of PW-2 Sampat is not reliable as he has levelled allegations against three persons of causing injury on the head of the deceased, whereas deceased has sustained only one injury on the head. As per Sampat, Pappu also gave blow with lathi on head but Pappu has not been charge-sheeted. As per the medical opinion, cause of death is due to abscess which might have been probably caused by the head injury. The evidence of doctor is also not directly linking the injury as cause of death. The deceased sustained a single blow but there is no evidence as to who had caused that injury.

6. In view of the above, we are not inclined to entertain the criminal leave to appeal and the same is accordingly, dismissed. (CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J (PANKAJ BHANDARI),J CHANDAN /2 (Downloaded on 07/01/2022 at 09:36:11 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)