Thulu Bhandari vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 4578 Jhar

                                              1




                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                             Cr. Revision No. 25 of 2001

                     Thulu Bhandari                        ...   ...      Petitioner
                                         Versus
                     The State of Jharkhand and Ors. ...         ...   Opp. Parties
                                         ---

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

09/02.12.2021

1. Heard Mr. Srikant Swaroop, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has advanced his argument today and has submitted that the present revision application has been filed by the informant of the case against the judgment of acquittal. He submits that the present revision has been filed as the State did not file any acquittal appeal and the informant at the relevant point of time had no remedy except to file revision application. He further submits that the informant of the case had stated in the F.I.R. as well as in his deposition that the marriage had taken place five years ago and his sister had died in her matrimonial house and there was smell of kerosene oil from the remnant part of blouse on the person of the deceased. He submits that the fact that the marriage had taken place only five years ago, has been totally ignored by the learned trial court while acquitting the opposite parties of the present case and the learned trial court has held that mere proof of demand of dowry and torture was not sufficient to hold the opposite party Nos.-2 to 4 guilty of the offence as the prosecution has not been able to prove that the opposite party No.-2 to 4 had burnt the sister of the informant. The learned counsel also submits that the informant in his depositing has stated that the smell of kerosene oil was coming out of deceased body and her garments and this fact was also supported by the post-mortem report. The learned counsel

submits that the learned trial court has further directed the informant of the case to pay the compensation to the accused persons amounting to Rs. 5,000/-. He submits that the impugned judgment of acquittal is ex-facie perverse and gross injustice has been done in the present case and accordingly, the impugned judgment be set-aside and the matter be remitted to the learned court below for fresh trial.

3. Learned counsel for the opposite party-State Mr. Bishambhar Shastri submits that he would go through the records of the case and then advance his arguments on the next date.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party Nos. 2 to 4 Mr. Kaushal Kishor Mishra has submitted that he does not have any up to date instruction in the matter, but he has been representing the opposite party Nos.-2 to 4 and has entered his appearance by filing Vakalatnama on their behalf and therefore, he will also argue the present case by referring the lower court records.

5. During the course of hearing, this Court found it difficult to go through the depositions as they are handwritten. Office is directed to get the depositions of the present case duly typed and place it on record prior to the next date of hearing.

6. Post this case for further hearing on 04.01.2022.

7. Let this mater be treated as part heard.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Mukul