Madhya Pradesh High Court
The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Raja Bhaiyya on 16 February, 2022
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC-42932-2020
State of MP Vs. Raja Bhaiya and ors.
Gwalior, Dated : 16/02/2022
Shri C.P. Singh, Counsel for the applicant/State.
This application under Section 378(4) of CrPC has been filed
seeking grant of leave to file appeal against the judgment dated
23.07.2020 passed by the JMFC, Lahar, District Bhind in R.C.T.
No.701338/2013, by which the respondents have been acquitted of the
charges under Sections 294, 323/34 (2 counts), 324/34, 336, 506 (Part-
II) of IPC.
2. It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that according to
the prosecution case, on 07.12.2013 at about 10:00 AM, the
complainant Nandram was waylaid by the respondents and he was
abused and in furtherance of common intention, the respondent
Awdhesh assaulted the complainant Nandram by lathi. It is further
submitted that the respondent Raja Bhaiya assaulted Amar Singh (son
of the complainant) by an axe, whereas respondent Bhoop Singh and
Bhadole (dead) pelted pieces of earthen tiles. On the report of the
complainant Nandram Kushwah, police registered Crime No.172/2013
for offence under Sections 336, 294, 323, 506, 34 of IPC. After
completing the investigation, the charge-sheet was filed for offence
under Sections 336, 294, 323, 506, 324, 34 of IPC.
3. The Trial Court by order dated 19.02.2014 framed the charges
under Sections 294, 323/34, 324, 336, 506 (Part-II) of IPC.
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC-42932-2020
State of MP Vs. Raja Bhaiya and ors.
4. Respondents abjured their guilt and pleaded not guilty.
5. Prosecution examined Nandram (PW-1), Amar Singh (PW-2),
Jaswant Singh (PW-3), Bhagwan Singh (PW-4), Rekha Kushwah
(PW-5), M.R. Bharti (PW-6) and Dr. B.R. Morya (PW-7).
6. Respondents examined Raja Bhaiya (DW-1) in their defence.
7. The Trial Court by the impugned judgment has acquitted the
respondents of the charges mentioned above.
8. Challenging the judgment of acquittal, it is submitted by the
counsel for the applicant/State that from the MLC of Amar Singh (Ex.
P-10) and Nandram (Ex. P-9), it is clear that they had sustained
injuries. The Court below has given undue importance to minor
omissions and contradictions.
9. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant/State.
10. The prosecution has examined Dr. B.R. Morya (PW-7), who had
identified the signatures and handwriting of Dr. B.S. Kushwaha who
had medically examined the witnesses. It is not out of place to
mention here that Dr. B.S. Kushwaha has expired. As per the MLC,
Ex. P-10 of (PW-2) Amar Singh, following injuries were found: -
(1) one incised wound of 1 cm and full thickness
of right side upper lip, oblique in shape, margins are clear
cut, clotted blood was found,
(2) tenderness in upper jaw right side of teeth, due
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC-42932-2020
State of MP Vs. Raja Bhaiya and ors.
to swelling mouth is not opening so teeth are not seen; and
(3) swelling over right side of chick.
11. Nandram (PW-1) had sustained one contusion of 4''x0.5''
obliquely placed over left side posterio-lateral surface of chest,
reddish in color. His MLC is Ex P-9.
Dr. B.R. Morya (PW-7) was cross-examined and in his
cross-examination, he clarified that he himself had not seen injuries.
He clarified that the injury found on the lips of Amar Singh (PW-2)
could have been caused by blade. However, the said injury was not
caused by any heavy sharp edged weapon. Nandram (PW-1) could
have sustained injury due to fall. This witness was not in a position to
depose as to whether the injured had sustained any fracture or not.
12. The Trial Court after considering the evidence of the witnesses
found that the injuries sustained by Amar Singh (PW-2) was not
caused by any heavy sharp edged weapon. The evidence of Amar
Singh (PW-2) that four stitches were given to him was not found
corroborated by any medical evidence. Amar Singh (PW-2) had also
stated that because of injuries sustained by him, his clothes got stained
with blood, but M.R. Bharti (PW-6) who had investigated the matter
had not made any statement about the recovery of blood stained
clothes. Further, no seizure memo has been placed on record to show
that blood stained clothes of the injured Amar Singh (PW-2) were
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC-42932-2020
State of MP Vs. Raja Bhaiya and ors.
seized. Furthermore, in the FIR, Ex. P-1, the complainant Nandram
(PW-1) had stated that Amar Singh (PW-2) had sustained injury on left
side of his lips, whereas according to the MLC report, Ex. P-10, he
had sustained injury on right side of his lips. Furthermore, according
to the prosecution case, the respondent Awdhesh assaulted on the back
of Nandram (PW-1), whereas in the MLC, Ex.P-9, Nandram had
sustained injuries on back side of his chest. Nandram (PW-1) has
stated that he had sustained multiple injuries because of pelting stones
and bricks, but only one injury was found. Furthermore, the
allegations that Nandram was repeatedly assaulted by lathi is also not
supported by medical report. The Trial Court after appreciating the
evidence in detail has held that the prosecution has failed to prove the
guilt of the respondents beyond reasonable doubt.
13. It is well established principle of law that if two views are
possible, then while considering the appeal against the judgment of
acquittal, the Appellate Court should not reverse the findings merely
on the ground that the Trial Court should have adopted another view.
Unless and until the findings recorded by the Trial Court are perverse,
the same cannot be reversed in an appeal against judgment of
acquittal.
14. No perversity could be pointed out by the counsel for the State.
Even otherwise, this Court has gone through the evidence as well as
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC-42932-2020
State of MP Vs. Raja Bhaiya and ors.
findings recorded by the Trial Court and no perversity could be seen.
Accordingly, no case is made out for grant of leave to file appeal
against the judgment dated 23.07.2020 passed by the JMFC, Lahar,
District Bhind in R.C.T. No.701338/2013.
15. The application fails and is hereby dismissed.
(G.S. Ahluwalia)
Judge
Abhi
ABHISHEK
CHATURVEDI
2022.02.22
18:22:43
+05'30'
