Meena Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 5022 Jhar

                                  -1-

                  Acquittal Appeal (S.J.) No.01 of 2006

(Against the Judgment of acquittal dated 16.10.2004, passed
by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamshedpur, in C/1 Case
No.808/98 - T.R. Case No.904 of 2004).


     Meena Pandey                                ......        Appellant

                            Versus
     1.   State of Jharkhand
     2.   Jai Prakash Pandey
     3.   Dhananjay Pandey                       ...... Respondents
                               ---------

For the Appellant : Mr. N. K. Jaiswal, Advocate For the State : Mr.Vineet Kr. Vashistha, Spl.P.P For Resp. Nos.2 & 3 : Mrs. J. Mazumdar, Advocate

---------

PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

---------

By the Court

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 & 3.

2. The present acquittal appeal has been preferred against the judgment of acquittal dated 16.10.2004, passed by the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamshedpur, in C/1 Case No.808/ 1998 (T.R. Case No.904 of 2004), whereby the respondent Nos.2 & 3 have been acquitted of the charge under Sections 498-A/ 384 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It appears that the complaint case being No.808 of 1998 was initiated on the basis of the complaint filed by the complainant on 08.12.1998. It appears that the marriage of the parties were solemnized in the year 1994 and the complaint was made against the husband and devar. Subsequently, a complaint case being Complaint Case No.25 of 1998 was filed in which the parties have compromised and accordingly, the case was dropped. Again after one year, the present complaint case was filed in which the parties have contested. Altogether four witnesses have been produced by the complainant namely, C.W.-1, Shaligram Tiwary (Since deceased), C.W.-2, Binod Kumar Tiwary, C.W.-3, Meena Pandey (complainant) and C.W.-4 namely, Rakesh Kumar

Shukla. It further appears that the evidence of the complainant witnesses has been evaluated by the court below and it has been found that their testimonies are not trustworthy. There was contradiction in their testimonies. Considering the above facts, the court below has passed the judgment of acquittal.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and from perusal of record, it appears that the parties have got married in the year 1994. There was a matrimonial dispute between the parties and accordingly a complaint petition was filed in which the parties have compromised. Subsequently, again in the year 1998, the present complaint case has been filed. The court below after evaluating the evidence has given the finding that the complainant has failed to convince the judicial mind regarding the commission of crime. The testimonies of the complainant witnesses have not been found trustworthy and accordingly, the judgment of acquittal has been passed by the court below.

5. Considering the above fact and the year of dispute, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the judgment of acquittal dated 16.10.2004, Accordingly, the present acquittal appeal is, hereby, dismissed.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi Dated, the 12th December, 2022.

Chandan /NAFR