Sahdeo Prasad vs The State Of Jharkhand & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 336 Jhar

                                    1

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                   Cr. Revision No. 1010 of 2010
                                   -------

        Sahdeo Prasad                     .....    .... Petitioner
                                   Versus
        The State of Jharkhand & Ors.     .....    ....Opposite Parties

        CORAM       : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
                              -------
        For the Petitioner            :Mr. Randhir Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party-State :Mr. Arup Kumar Dey, APP .........

07/19.01.2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This revision application is directed against the judgment of acquittal dated 10.8.2010 passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Koderma in Criminal Appeal No.81 of 2005; whereby the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.6.2005 passed by the learned SDJM, Koderma, corresponding to G.R.No.600/01, T.R.No.202 of 2005; whereby the accused were convicted for the offence under Section 341, 323 and 325 IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of one month u/s 341 IPC, Six months each u/S 323 and further sentenced S.I. for Three years with a fine of Rs.1000/- u/s 325 IPC and all the sentences were directed to run concurrently, has been set aside and the appeal filed by the accused was allowed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the learned trial court has convicted the accused on cogent evidence but the learned Appellate Court has allowed the appeal of the opposite parties and reversed the judgment of conviction. The learned Appellate Court has failed to appreciate the finding given by the trial court.

4. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2-4 submits that there is no error in the order passed by the learned Appellate Court and after going through the finding, the learned Appellate Court has rightly reverse the judgment of conviction.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the documents available on record it appears that the learned Appellate Court meticulously dealt with the evidence, both oral and documentary, and came to the finding that no independent person come forward to support the

case of the prosecution . Almost all the material witnesses are family members of the informant and also contradictory on material points. It is specific finding of the learned Appellate Court that the I.O did not find any objective at the place of occurrence like blood stain mark and cloth of the informant. Further the prosecution has also not seized the cloth of the informant. By going through these lacuna, the learned Appellate Court acquitted the opposite party.

In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court does not find any error in the impugned judgment passed by the learned Appellate Court; as such the instant application stands dismissed.

6. Let the LCR along with a copy of this order be sent to the court concerned forthwith.

(Deepak Roshan, J.) Fahim/-