Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P. vs Meenu S/O Bhureydeen And 02 Others on 22 December, 2022
Bench: Ashwani Kumar Mishra, Shiv Shanker Prasad
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 43
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 780 of 2022
Appellant :- State of U.P.
Respondent :- Meenu S/O Bhureydeen And 02 Others
Counsel for Appellant :- Shiv Kumar Pal
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.
This appeal is by the State alongwith an application to grant leave to challenge the judgment and order of acquittal of the accused respondents, dated 05.09.2022, passed by the Special Judge, Special Court, POCSO Act/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Meerut in Sessions Trial no.55 of 2016 (State of U.P. vs. Meenu and others) arising out of Case Crime No.132 of 2015, under Sections 452, 323, 354Ka, 506, 376, 511 IPC and 7/8 of POCSO Act, Police Station Bhawanpur, District Meerut.
Prosecution case is that a written report was given on 10.04.2015 by the informant stating that his 16 year old minor daughter was standing inside her house when obscene comments were made by the accused persons and on her objecting to it the accused held her hand and attempted to drag her. After raising an alarm others came on spot and accused fled. Injuries on the victim were medically examined. However, after 53 days on 03.06.2015 it was alleged that the victim was subjected to sexual assault. The investigation was undertaken in which statement of victim was recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and ultimately charge sheet was filed under sections 452, 323, 354Ka, 506, 376, 511 IPC and 7/8 of POCSO Act.
Oral and documentary evidences have been led in the matter by the prosecution which includes testimony of victim. In the medical examination report the victim has been found to be major as her age has been determined to be above 18 years and as per school register also her age has been found to be 18 years 3 months 15 days. The trial court on the basis of evidence led in the matter has observed that the delay of 53 days in coming up with subsequent version remains unexplained and there is no reason why such facts were not disclosed initially. The medical examination does not support the commissioning of such offence. It has otherwise come on record that various disputes between two families were pending at different forums. In view of the availability of reasons for false implication as also the unexplained delay in coming up with the subsequent version the prosecution case itself has been found doubtful by the court below and the accused respondents have been acquitted.
Although various arguments have been advanced but no perversity or error in the appreciation of evidence by the court below is shown, at this stage. The view taken by the court below is clearly a permissible view in the facts of the case and just because a different view would be possible would not be a ground for the appellate court to interfere with the judgment and order of acquittal. Neither any illegality or perversity is shown in the judgement of the trial court nor any triable issue is raised, which may require interference of this Court.
Accordingly, the application to grant leave for instituting the present appeal is rejected. The appeal is also dismissed.
Order Date :- 22.12.2022
Ashok Kr.
