The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Suraj @ Vishambhar Singh
2023 Latest Caselaw 3139 MP

                                 1
 IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                       AT GWALIOR
                         BEFORE
            HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ROHIT ARYA
                            &
      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH
                   ON THE 21 st OF FEBRUARY, 2023
                 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2762 of 2023

BETWEEN:-
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
STATION MOW, DISTRICT BHIND (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                             .....APPELLANT
(SHRI  A.K.  NIRANKARI-         PUBLIC     PROSECUTOR        FOR    THE
APPELLANT/STATE)

AND
1.    SURAJ @ VISHAMBHAR SINGH S/O SHRI HETAM
      RAWAT, AGE-22 YEARS, R/O GRAM SUNVAI
      POLICE STATION VIJAYPUR DISTRICT SHEOPUR
      (MADHYA PRADESH), PRESENTLY RESIDENT OF
      NEAR GHOSIPURA RAILWAY STATION, HOUSE OF
      PAPPU KUSHWAH POLICE STATION BAHODAPUR,
      DISTRICT GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.    PROSECUTRIX    R/O       DWARIKAPURI,       MOW
      DISTRICT BHIND

                                                           .....RESPONDENT

Th is appeal coming on for admission this day, JUSTICE ROHIT ARYA passed the following:

Present appeal under sub-section (2) of Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, is directed against the judgment of acquittal dated 14.12.2022 passed by VI Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Bhind (M.P.) in SCATR

No.140/2019, whereby respondent No.1 has been acquitted of the charges levelled against him under Sections 363, 366A, 376D(A), in the alternative under Section 376(3), 506 of IPC and under Section 5(g)/6 of POCSO Act and under Section 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

We have heard learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of State. We have also perused the impugned judgment.

I n the light of the findings of the Special Court which are based on critical evaluation of the evidence on record, conclusion of acquittal drawn particularly in view of paragraphs 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63 and 64 to of the

impugned judgment is found to be impregnable.

Consequently, present appeal stands dismissed.

  (ROHIT ARYA)                                  (SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH)
     JUDGE                                               JUDGE
yog




                               YOGESH
                               VERMA
                               2023.02.23
            VALSALA
            VASUDEVAN
            2018.10.26
            15:14:29 -07'00'
                               11:35:51
                               +05'30'