State Of U.P. vs Samid S/O Jakir And 02 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 2030 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 47
 

 
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 10 of 2023
 

 
Appellant :- State of U.P.
 
Respondent :- Samid S/O Jakir And 02 Others
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Shiv Kumar Pal
 

 
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

Delay in filing the present appeal has been explained to the satisfaction of the Court. Delay is, accordingly, condoned.

This appeal is filed by the State alongwith application for grant of leave to challenge the judgment and order dated 31.05.2022, passed by Additional District and Session Judge/F.T.C.-1, Rampur in Session Trial No.30 of 2019 (State vs. Samid and others) arising out of Case Crime No.282 of 2018, under Sections 376, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Swar, District Rampur, whereby the accused respondents have been acquitted.

As per the prosecution case, the victim aged 24 years has been made a complaint that the accused respondent no.1 on the pretext of marriage has been forming physical relation with her and when she insisted for marriage the accused has not agreed to marry her. It is alleged that on 10.05.2018 at about 10.00 AM the victim was called in the house of the accused and subjected to offence under Section 376 IPC. When the victim resisted she was told that the accused would marry her. The victim met the father (accused respondent no.3) of the accused respondent no.1, who not only denied his consent for marriage but also threatened the victim of dire consequences.

On the basis of aforesaid report the investigation proceeded and ultimately resulted in submission of chargesheet against the accused respondents under Section 376 IPC read with Section 504, 506 IPC.

The trial ultimately proceeded in which witnesses have been produced by the prosecution. PW-1, who happens to be victim, has clearly stated that the she knew the accused respondent no.1 for the last 6-7 years and both were living in same lane. She has also stated that about 4 years back the accused respondent no.1, on the pretext of marriage, formed physical relations with her and now he has refused to entertain her. The last incident allegedly was of 10.05.2018 at 10 AM.

The doctor has been examined as PW-2, who has stated that victim has no injury on her person and her hymen was old healed. The pathological report also did not disclose existence of dead or live spermatozoa.

Trial court on the basis of the evidence led in the matter and relying upon the law on the subject laid down by the Supreme Court has concluded that this was case of consensual relationship between the parties and merely because the accused respondent no.1 has breached promise of marriage it would not mean that any offence has been committed under the provisions of Indian Penal Code. It has also been observed by the court below that the prosecution has failed to prove that there was any intent to cheat on part of accused respondents or that they acted with fraudulent intent to deceive the victim.

Learned A.G.A. submits that the evidence has not been correctly examined by the Court.

We have gone through the judgment passed by the court below and on its perusal find that the view taken by the court below is clearly a permissible view, and just because a different view could be taken would not be a ground for this Court to interfere with the judgment and order of acquittal. No perversity is shown in the judgement or any triable issue is shown to arise.

In view of the above, the prayer made by the State for grant of leave is refused. The appeal is consequently dismissed.

Order Date :- 19.1.2023

Ashok Kr.