The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Dileep
2022 Latest Caselaw 8411 MP

                              -1-


The High Court of Madhya Pradesh : Bench At Indore

                         BEFORE
      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)
                   ON THE 24th OF JUNE, 2022


          MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 37996 of 2020

      Between:-
      THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
      OFFICER THROUGH P.S. BADNAWAR (MADHYA
      PRADESH)
                                           .....PETITIONER
      (BY MS. HARSHLATA SONI, PANEL LAWYER)


      AND

      DILEEP S/O GANPAT BHURIYA , AGED ABOUT 32
1.    YEARS,     OCCUPATION:   LABOUR     GRAM-
      KANKRAJ,TEHSIL-BADNAWAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
      BHAWAR S/O GANPAT BHURIYA , AGED ABOUT 38
2.    YEARS, OCCUPATION: MAJDURI GRAM KANKRAJ,
      TEHSIL BADNAWAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                        .....RESPONDENTS
      (BY MS. PRUVI PARIK, ADVOCATE)
        This application coming on for hearing this day, the court
passed the following:
                           ORDER

The applicant / State has filed this application under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 03.02.2022

passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Badnawar, District - Dhar, whereby the respondents have been acquitted from the charges under Sections 294, 325, 325/34 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned Panel Lawyer for the applicant / State submits that the trial Court has erred in law and facts in disbelieving the statement of Kalu (P.W-1) / injured. The statement of Kalu is corroborated by the medical evidence and R.S. Jaat (P.W-2). The statement of P.W-2 has not been considered by the trial Court. Kalu (P.W-1), Dashrath (P.W-2) and Shyamubai (P.W-3) have supported the case of the prosecution. The trial Court has erred in law and facts in acquitting the respondents from the charges under Sections 294, 325, 325/34 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the respondents has supported the impugned judgment and submits that the trial Court is justified in acquitting the respondents.

I have heard the counsel for the parties and perused the record.

After considering the arguments advanced by counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, this Court is of the opinion that the appeal is arguable, therefore, leave is granted.

Office is directed to register it as regular criminal appeal. Consequently, the appeal be treated as an admitted appeal. Issue a bailable warrant to the respondents in the sum of Rs.20,000/- each to secure thier presence before this Court on

11.07.2022.

Let a copy of this order be retained in the file of criminal appeal.

M.Cr.C. stands disposed of to the extent indicated above.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)) JUDGE Ravi Digitally signed by RAVI PRAKASH Date: 2022.06.25 11:26:55 +05'30'