Monday, 11, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Manohar Lal Sharma vs Pankaj And 2 Others
2018 Latest Caselaw 3609 ALL

Citation : 2018 Latest Caselaw 3609 ALL
Judgement Date : 13 November, 2018

Allahabad High Court
Manohar Lal Sharma vs Pankaj And 2 Others on 13 November, 2018
Bench: Harsh Kumar



HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?A.F.R. 
 
Court No. - 41
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 378 No. - 124 of 2018
 

 
Applicant :- Manohar Lal Sharma
 
Opposite Party :- Pankaj And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Desh Ratan Chaudhary
 

 
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

The present application has been moved for leave to file appeal against the impugned judgment and order dated 4.9.2018 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Bulandshahar in Complaint Case No.345 of 2018 (Manoharlal Sharma Vs. Pankaj and two others), under section 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Jahangirabad, District Bulandshahar, acquitting the respondents from the charges of offences under section 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the incident in question has taken place within five months of marriage wherein for non fulfilment of demand of dowry she was beaten by respondents; that a complaint was filed by father of victim in which by impugned order learned Magistrate has acquitted the accused-persons of the charges under sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act.

The perusal of record shows that the trial court has held that there is no medical certificate or report on record with regard to injuries alleged to have been caused by the accused-respondents upon beating her on 21.5.2013 or 22.7.2013. The trial court has found that there are multiple material contradictions in the statements of complainant and the victim as the complainant has stated to have spent a sum of Rs.8000/- to Rs.10,000/- in obtaining medical of victim and has further improved the expenses to the tune of Rs.15,000/- to Rs.16,000/- in cross examination at page 5 and again raised it to Rs.25,000/- at page 6 of the cross examination, while his daughter, the victim has stated to have spent a sum of Rs.50,000/- in obtaining medical certificate but there is no medical certificate or other medical evidence on record regarding alleged injuries. For these contradictions, the complaint case has been disbelieved.

In view of the above material contradictions, I find that the reasoning given by the learned trial court is cogent and there is no manifest error of fact on law or any perversity, which may require interference by this Court. It is not the case of applicant that the learned trial court failed to consider any evidence, which was there on record.

Perusal of record shows that the impugned judgment rendered by the trial court is absolutely flawless since he has analyzed the evidence in great detail and appreciated them in correct perspective. The trial court has ascribed cogent reasons for not placing reliance on the untruthful testimony of complainant and her witnesses. In such a fact situation, High Court is not advised under law to interfere with the judgment of acquittal.

It is settled principle of law as held by Hon'ble the Supreme court in the case of K. Prakashan Vs. P.K. Surenderan, (2008) 1 SCC 258 "When two views are possible, appellate Court should not reverse the Judgment of acquittal merely because the other view was possible. When Judgment of trial Court was neither perverse, nor suffered from any legal infirmity or non consideration/misappropriation of evidence on record, reversal thereof by High Court was not justified".

In view of discussions made above, I have come to the conclusion that the above findings recorded by trial are cogent and there is no legal infirmities or perversity in the findings recorded by court below. The appeal is devoid of merits and there is no sufficient ground for granting permission to file appeal.

The application for leave to file appeal is dismissed and the appeal also stands dismissed.

Order Date :- 13.11.2018

Tamang

Order on Memo of Appeal

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

Dismissed.

For order, see order of date passed on application for grant of leave to file appeal.

Order Date :- 13.11.2018

Tamang

 

 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter