Smt. Vishnu Bai vs Haribahadur Singh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4113 MP

                                      1
              IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                           AT GWALIOR
                               CRR No. 644 of 2022
                    (SMT. VISHNU BAI Vs HARIBAHADUR SINGH AND OTHERS)

Dated : 24-03-2022
      Shri Satyendra Singh Rajput, learned counsel for petitioner.

      Proxy Counsel Shri Ramadhar Choubey appearing on behalf of Advocate
General.
      This criminal revision has been filed by the petitioner against the judgment
passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Chachoda District Guna on 07.01.2022 in
Cr.A. 38/2018 by which he has maintained acquittal of respondent No.1 to 4 under

Section 498-A of IPC on 25.01.2018 in RCT No. 751/2014.

Brief facts for disposal of this revision are that petitioner is wife of respondent No.1 Haribahadur. Respondent No.2 is elder brother of respondent No.1 and respondent No.3 is mother of respondent No.1. Respondent No.4 is sister-in-law of respondent No.1. Marriage between petitioner and respondent No.1 was solemnized before 10-12 years. For sometime they lived peacefully. Thereafter respondents No.1 to 4 started harassing her due to non-fulfillment of dowry demand. Petitioner separated from the respondents No.1 to 4. She filed complaint against them under Section 498-A of IPC Learned trial Court after conducting trial

has acquitted respondent No.1 to 4. Likewise Appellate Court dismissed the appeal of petitioner. Aggrieved by this, she has filed this revision.

In revision petition nowhere it has been pointed out that what illegality committed by the Court below in the impugned judgment. She has filed this criminal revision as if this is second appeal.

The Apex Court in the case of Duli Chand Vs. Delhi Administration reported in (1975) 4 SCC 649 has held that, the jurisdiction of the High Court in a criminal revision application is severely restricted and it cannot embark upon a re- appreciation of the evidence. The said judgment has been relied by the Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Jagmohan Singh Kuldip Singh Anand and Others reported in (2004) 7 SCC 659.

In the opinion of this Court, the Court below has dealt with every aspect of the matter and, therefore, the decision making process adopted by the Court below

cannot be found fault with and no illegality has been committed in acquitting the respondents No.1 to 4.

In this view of the matter, I find no reason to interfere in the matter. This Court is not required to re-appreciate the evidence as an appellate Court in its

revisional jurisdiction. In absence of any illegality which warrants interference by this Court in revisional jurisdiction, interference is declined.

Consequently, the revision petition is dismissed.

                                                       (DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL)
 YOGENDRA OJHA
 2022.03.25 15:16:49                                            JUDGE
 +05'30'


ojha