The State Of M.P. vs Satish Kumar
2022 Latest Caselaw 13969 MP

                                                                1
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT JABALPUR
                                                            BEFORE
                                          HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL
                                                     ON THE 31st OF OCTOBER, 2022

                                                CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 264 of 2001

                                     BETWEEN:-
                                     THE STATE OF M.P. THROUGH P.S. SHIKARPUR,
                                     DISTRICT EAST NIMAD (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                              .....APPELLANT
                                     (BY SHRI SANTOSH YADAV, DY. GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                                     AND
                                     SATISH KUMAR SON OF JAGDISH PRASAD,
                                     AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, RESIDENT OF
                                     MOMINPURA, BURHANPUR, DISTRICT EAST
                                     NIMAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                             .....RESPONDENT
                                     (NONE )

                                   Th is appeal coming on for direction this day, th e court passed the
                          following:
                                                                 ORDER

Learned Dy. Government Advocate for the appellant/State is heard. This appeal under Section 378 (i) of Cr.P.C has been filed against the

judgment and order of acquittal dated 24.04.2000 passed in Criminal Case No. 398/1997 (State of M.P. Vs. Jagdish Prasad and another) by Mahesh Kumar Saini, Judicial Magistrate First Class, Burhanpur, whereby the respondents/accused have been acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 509 of IPC.

It is a settled position of law that appellate Court should not interfere in the findings of acquittal recorded by the trial Court if two views are possible

Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMITABH RANJAN Signing time: 11/3/2022 1:45:22 PM

and one favoring the accused has been taken by the trial Court.

On a meticulous examination of the evidence of Kamta Bai (PW-1) and Sunita Bai (PW-2) it is apparent that evidence of both the witnesses is full of contradictions and omissions, therefore, learned trial Court has not committed any error in disbelieving their evidence.

Therefore, there are no reason to interfere with the judgement of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Court.

Hence, this appeal filed by the State being devoid of merits is dismissed.

(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL) JUDGE Amitabh

Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMITABH RANJAN Signing time: 11/3/2022 1:45:22 PM