The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Aashish Barman
2022 Latest Caselaw 6906 MP

                                1
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          AT JABALPUR
                                BEFORE
                    HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANJULI PALO
                         ON THE 7th OF MAY, 2022

                CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1029 of 2021

        Between:-
        THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
        ITS P.S. BARELA DISTT. JABALPUR (MADHYA
        PRADESH)

                                                           .....APPELLANT
        (BY SHRI MANAS MANI VERMA, GOVT. ADVOCATE)

        AND

        AASHISH   BARMAN     S/O   SHIVKUMAR
        BARMAN , AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/O PATEL
        MOHOLLA WARD NO.2, SALIWADA, PS.
        BARELA, DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA
        PRADESH)

                                                         .....RESPONDENT


      Th is appeal coming for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
                                 ORDER

This appeal has been filed by the State under Section 378(iii) of

Cr.P.C. against the order of acquittal dated 20.02.2020 passed by the Special Judge POCSO Act, District Jabalpur, whereby the respondent has been acquitted from the charges under Sections 354 & 457 of I.P.C. and Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

Heard Govt. Advocate for the State. Perused the record. After perusal of the record, it appears that there was some enmity between the parties. There are other evidence on record, which make the statements of the prosecutrix doubtful. Therefore, this Court does not find any ground to interfere in the findings recorded of the learned lower court. The findings are based on proper appreciation of evidence on record. There is no perversity or illegality in the impugned judgment.

In the case of Gemini Bala Koteshwara Rao and Ors Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh [AIR 2010 SC 589] wherein it is held that it is open to the High Court to reappraise the evidence and conclusion drawn by the trial Court, but only in case when the judgments of the trial Court is stated to be perverse. The Apex Court explained the word "perverse" to

mean against weight of evidence. Even though two views are possible as an appellate court this Court should not reverse the judgment of acquittal mere because the other view was possible.

In the case of K.Prakashan Vs. P.K. Surendran [ (2008) 1 SCC 258] and T. Subramanian Vs. State of Tamil Nadu [(2006) 1 SCC 401] wherein it has been held that when the judgment of trial Court was neither perverse nor suffered from legal infirmity or non-consideration or misappropriation of evidence on record. As an appellate court this Court cannot not reverse the judgment of acquittal mere because the other view was possible. The prosecution cannot be said to have proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.

In view of the above principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the material and evidence available on record, no case is made out to allow this appeal. Hence, it is dismissed.

(SMT. ANJULI PALO) JUDGE rj

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by RAJESH KUMAR JYOTISHI Date: 2022.05.07 18:32:36 IST