Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P. vs Bhure @ Shaukeen S/O Alisher And ... on 8 February, 2023
Bench: Ashwani Kumar Mishra, Vinod Diwakar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 47
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 24 of 2023
Appellant :- State of U.P.
Respondent :- Bhure @ Shaukeen S/O Alisher And Another
Counsel for Appellant :- Shiv Kumar Pal
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.
Delay in filing of the appeal has been explained to the satisfaction of the Court.
Application is allowed. Delay in filing of appeal is condoned.
This appeal is by State alongwith an application for grant of leave to challenge the judgment of acquittal dated 6.4.2022, passed by Additional Sessions Judge/FTC, Meerut, in Sessions Trial No. 13 of 2013 (State Vs. Bhure alias Shaukeen and another ), arising out of Case Crime No.193 of 2012, under Section 376(2)(G) IPC, Police Station Bhawanpur, District Meerut.
Prosecution case is that while informant's daughter, aged 14 years, was sleeping in her house she was subjected to offence under Section 376 IPC at the hands of the accused, who entered the house during the night intervening 13/14.5.2012 at 3.00 am. The victim screamed on which informant and other relatives arrived. Two accused were seen leaving the place of incident with Tamancha (countrymade pistol) in their hands. On the basis of such written report the FIR was registered as Case Crime No.193 of 2012, and ultimately a chargesheet came to be submitted against the accused respondents under Section 376 IPC, which was subsequently altered to Section 376(2)(g) IPC.
The statement of victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she had supported the prosecution case. However, when the victim was produced as PW-2 during the trial, she has not supported the prosecution case at the stage of her cross-examination. She has stated that two persons, who entered the house had muffled their face and therefore they could not be recognized. The assailants otherwise were short in height, whereas the accused are tall. She has also disowned her statement previously made under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. She has stated that she gave her statement under the pressure of police personnel. Father of the victim (PW-1) has also given similar statement and has also stated that the victim had never informed him that she was subjected to offence of rape. The victim was medically examined wherein the allegation of rape is not substantiated, inasmuch as no internal or external injury has been found on the victim. The victim otherwise has disclosed her age between 18-19 years.
Since the victim and the informant both have not supported the prosecution case, the court below has come to the conclusion that prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of accused respondents beyond reasonable doubt.
We have been taken through the judgment by the learned AGA, and though it is asserted that the judgment is perverse but no error of fact or perversity is substantiated.
We have carefully examined the judgment of the court below and upon its examination we find that the view taken by the court below is clearly a permissible view, in the facts of the case.
In such circumstances and for the reasons recorded above we find that neither any triable issue is raised before us in this appeal nor any perversity is shown, which may persuade this Court to grant leave to assail the judgment of acquittal. Prayer made by the State for grant of leave is, accordingly, refused and the appeal, consequently, fails and is dismissed.
Order Date :- 8.2.2023
Anil
