State Of U.P. vs Fahim Ahmad S/O Maharwan
2023 Latest Caselaw 1139 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 47
 

 
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 1 of 2023
 

 
Appellant :- State of U.P.
 
Respondent :- Fahim Ahmad S/O Maharwan
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Shiv Kumar Pal
 

 
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

In Re:- Criminal Misc. Delay Condonation Application

We have perused the affidavit filed in support of the delay condonation application.

Cause shown in the affidavit filed in support of the delay condonation application for condonation of delay is sufficient.

The delay condonation application is thus allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

Order on Appeal

This appeal along with an application for grant of leave is instituted by the State challenging the judgment and order dated 04.07.2022 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/ Fast Track Court, Ist, Amroha in Session Trial No. 334 of 2016 (State of U.P. vs. Fahim Ahmad), arising out of Case Crime No. 221 of 2016, under Sections 376, 504, 506, 420 & 417 I.P.C., Police Station Hasanpur, District Amroha, whereby the court below has found the accused-respondent not guilty of the offence and he was acquitted.

As per prosecution case the victim/ informant belongs to a decent family where people are honest and the accused was on familiar terms with her. They were otherwise neighbours. It is then alleged that several years ago the accused expressed love for the victim and also proposed to marry her. The relationship was not opposed by the family of the victim and on the pretext of marriage the accused established physical relations with the victim/ informant. This continued for several years but when the victim pressed for the marriage the accused retracted from his promise of marriage whereafter the F.I.R. has been lodged. It is alleged that the victim has been subjected to offence under Section 376 I.P.C. on a false promise of marriage which the accused never intended to keep.

The trial proceeded after the charge-sheet was submitted in the matter and the prosecution led oral and documentary evidence in the matter. The victim has also appeared and supported the prosecution case. The medical report however does not support commissioning of offence of rape upon the victim.

On the basis of evidence led by the prosecution the court below has found that the relationship between the accused and the informant (victim) continued for long and was consensual and merely because the marriage ultimately was not solemnized cannot be a ground to implicate particularly when the relationship continued between them for nearly 6-7 years.

Although learned A.G.A. has tried to submit that the view taken by the court below is perverse but no such perversity is shown in the judgment. The view taken by the court below is clearly a permissible view in the facts of the present case and merely because a different view could be taken cannot be a ground to interfere with the order of acquittal. No triable issue is otherwise shown to arise in the facts of the case, which may persuade this Court to accept the prayer of the State to grant leave to institute the appeal.

Prayer made for grant of leave under Section 378(3) Cr.P.C. is declined.

The present government appeal consequently fails and is accordingly, dismissed.

Order Date :- 11.1.2023

Abhishek Singh