Rambaran Jatav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3979 MP

                                                                 1
         HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                 Cr.A. 5277/2021

             (Rambaran Jatav Vs. State of M.P. & Ors.)
Gwalior dated 23.03.2022
      Shri R.S. Kushwah, learned counsel for the appellant.
      Ms. Padamshri Agarwal, Panel Lawyer for the
respondent/State.

This criminal appeal has been filed by complainant/appellant against the judgment dated 23/07/2021 passed in SPL case No. 125/2016 by Special Judge {Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)} Act, 1989 District Shivpuri, whereby, respondents No. 2 to 8 have been acquitted from the charges under section 148, 341, 294, 504, 323, 323/148, 506 (II) of IPC and section 3(1) (da), 3(1) (dha), 3 (2) (5k) of SC & ST Act.

Brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are that on 26/04/2016 at about 9.30 Pm, the accused respondents formed an unlawful assembly with common object to insult the complainant, his son and others on caste basis and to cause harm to them. The guests of complainant were sitting in school compound at village Zujaee for attending marriage ceremony of son of the complainant/Rambaran. The accused persons abused his son by caste name "Chamar" and put waste material on the food plates. They pulled down him from horse and beaten him as well as the fellow guests who belong to the scheduled caste.

On 03/05/2016, FIR was lodged by the complainant at police station A.J.K, District Shivpuri, whereupon, crime No. 40/2016 was registered. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed under sections 148, 341, 294, 504, 323, 323/148, 506 (II) of IPC and section 3(1) (da), 3(1) (dha), 3

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Cr.A. 5277/2021

(2) (5k) of SC & ST Act against respondents No. 2 to 8. Charges were framed accordingly. After conclusion of trial, the respondents No. 2 to 8 were acquitted of the charges vide impugned judgment. Being aggrieved of the same, this appeal has been preferred by the appellant/complainant.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the material available on record.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the complainant and other witnesses were not the residents of the village where incident took place, therefore, they were not known to the accused persons, but from their evidence the commission of alleged offence is well established. So far as identity of the accused persons is concerned, the same is well established by evidence of PW/8 Rajaram Jatav, who is resident of the same village and whose presence on the spot is quite natural as he is father of the bride in whose marriage ceremony this incident took place. The fact of the injuries is duly corroborated by medical evidence. The trial Court has given undue weightage to the technical contradictions in the prosecution evidence and accordingly has erred in acquitting the respondents No. 2 to 8 from the charges. The appeal deserves to be allowed.

Learned Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent No.1 prays for passing of appropriate order in the light of evidence available on record.

Heard. Considered.

On thoughtful consideration of the arguments put forth by learned counsel for the appellant and on careful perusal of

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Cr.A. 5277/2021

the impugned judgment and material available on record, this Court is of the firm view that the trial Court has thoroughly appreciated the prosecution evidence and has rightly come to the conclusion that charges have not been proved against the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt.

As per prosecution story as many as seven accused persons and others formed unlawful assembly and pulled down the groom Rajveer Jatav from horse and beaten him with sticks and other weapons, but as per evidence of PW/10 Dr. Pankaj Gupta no visible injury was found on the person of Rajveer Jatav. At the time of medical examination he only complained pain on his waist. One other injured person namely Raghuveer was also medically examined by the same Doctor who sustained only one abrasion on his left hand. Thus the medical evidence does not support the prosecution story. Rather it negates the same and clearly supports the conclusion of the trial Court that false and fabricated report with exaggerated version has been lodged.

Besides above, identity of the accused persons has also not been established. The complainant and injured persons indisputably were not known to the accused persons and no Test Identification Parade was conducted. For identity of the accused persons, the evidence of PW/8 Rajaram Jatav is very important as he happens to be father of the girl in whose marriage ceremony the complainant, his son and other guests were present. He categorically admitted that so many villagers were gathered at the time of incident and he could not see the person who pelted stones. Thus, from the evidence of PW/8

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Cr.A. 5277/2021

Rajaram Jatav the identity of the accused persons is not established beyond reasonable doubt. On the other hand, he admitted that more than half Baratis were in drunken position who were engaged in violence by disturbing peace and tranquility. He further admitted that they were persuaded to lodge an FIR in the police station against the accused persons so that they may get money from State administration and they actually had got the same after lodging of the report. Thus learned trial Court has rightly concluded that the charges against the accused persons could not be proved by the prosecution evidence.

In view of above, this Court does not find any reason to interfere in the impugned judgment. This criminal appeal sans merit and is, therefore, dismissed.

                                                      (Satish Kumar Sharma)
                                                              Judge

Durgekar*
            Digitally signed by SANJAY NAMDEORAO

SANJAY      DURGEKAR
            DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
            PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH


NAMDEOR
            COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH

GWALIOR, postalCode=474001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=afa4701a2661e1fb7720c022ffc277

AO 608ce55ba67f3594a641181b9ae8448e58, pseudonym=DA26B82C5BC4CAF69072CA5 A13CA996C4169AB06, serialNumber=1190D1488DBA862FB108ED

DURGEKAR 66262DC2DC2CB9D310D73128B3A6E7B04 6FCF28227, cn=SANJAY NAMDEORAO DURGEKAR Date: 2022.03.24 17:40:36 +05'30'