Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P. vs Ashish Alias Ashu on 19 December, 2014
Bench: Rakesh Tiwari, Vijay Lakshmi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Court No. - 36
A.F.R.
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 4880 of 2014
Appellant :- State Of U.P.
Respondent :- Ashish Alias Ashu
Counsel for Appellant :- Govt.Advocate
Hon'ble Rakesh Tiwari,J.
Hon'ble Mrs. Vijay Lakshmi,J.
(By Hon'ble Mrs. Vijay Lakshmi, J.)
The State has preferred this appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 04.09.2014 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge ( SC/ST Act), Gautam Budh Nagar in Sessions Trial No. 515 of 2010 ( State Vs. Ashish alias Ashu) under Section 342 and 376 I.P.C. and 3(1) 12 of SC/ST Act and has sought permission for such purpose by means of this application under Section 378(3) Cr.P.C.
We have heard learned A.G.A. representing the appellant-State and have carefully gone through the impugned judgment.
The learned A.G.A. has assailed the legality and correctness of the judgment impugned by arguing that the learned trial court has not properly appreciated the evidence and has decided the case on the basis of conjectures and surmises; the learned trial court has not weighed and assessed the evidence in proper perspective and has disbelieved the prosecution story on the basis of minor contradictions without keeping in view the fact that due to lapse of time, the memory fades and due to this some minor contradictions in the statements of witnesses are bound to occur.
After having heard learned A.G.A. and on a careful scrutiny of the judgment impugned we are of the firm view that the prosecution in this case has miserably failed to prove its case beyond doubt against the accused and the instant appeal filed by State against their acquittal is devoid of any merit.
A perusal of the judgment impugned shows that the prosecutrix had some dispute with her husband due to which she left her home and ran away with the accused. It has been found during trial that while leaving the house, she had taken with her the silver and gold jewellery and cash also. She had intimate relations with the accused as she has admitted the fact that accused had gifted her a Nokia mobile phone from which she used to talk with accused. The prosecutrix has stated that she was made to inhale some intoxicated medicine due to which she felt unconscious and could not resist. She has further stated that the accused kept her in a room at Agra. She lived there for 13 days. On first day, the accused brought food from a hotel and on the next day he brought a small stove and other utensils for cooking. She has further stated that she did not eat anything for 13 days due to the reason that she remained unconscious during those 13 days under the influence of the intoxicating medicine which the accused forcibly made her to inhale at regular intervals. On thirteenth day, she came out of the room to buy some medicine because she was suffering from abscess on her leg and called her husband, who advised her to go to police chowki. From police chowki, her husband and police brought her back.
The aforesaid statement of prosecutrix examined in court as P.W. 1 appears wholly unreliable, unnatural and unworthy of credence. During her medical examination, no external or internal injury has been found by the doctor. Her age was found to be above 19 years. Influence of any obnoxious medicine in her body has not been found by the doctor.
Moreover, the following lines stated by P.W. 3 -Kamal, falsify the prosecution case in toto :
**eSus fjiksVZ ugha djus ds fo"k; esa le>k;k FkkA eSus laq?kkus okyh ckr fy[kus ls euk fd;k Fkk fd >wBh ckr ugha pysxh] ysfdu ;s yksx ugha ekus FksA **
Under these circumstances, the learned trial court has rightly disbelieved her evidence and has rightly acquitted the accused from the charges under Section 342 and 376 I.P.C. and 3(1) 12 of SC/ST Act. There appears no reason to interfere in the judgment impugned. The leave to appeal is refused and the application for leave to appeal is rejected.
As a consequence, the appeal also stands dismissed.
Order Date :- 19.12.2014
S.B.
