The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Mansharam @ Sonu Kushwah
2023 Latest Caselaw 7875 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 12 th OF MAY, 2023
                  CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 4574 of 2023

BETWEEN:-
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
THANA HAIDARGARH, DISTRICT VIDISHA (MADHYA
PRADESH).

                                                             .....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI A.K.NIRANKARI - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)

AND
MANSHARAM @ SONU KUSHWAH S/O CHETRAM
KUSHWAH, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, R/O - GRAM
BARBAI THANA HAIDARGARH, DISTRICT VIDISHA
(MADHYA PRADESH).

                                                           .....RESPONDENT


      Th is appeal coming on for admission this day, JUSTICE ROHIT

ARYA passed the following:
                                    ORDER

Heard on I.A.No.8716 of 2023, filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.

As per office report, appeal is barred by 18 days.

For the reasons mentioned in the application, same is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned.

Heard on I.A. No.5938 of 2023, which is an application under Section 378 (3) Cr.P.C. moved on behalf o f State seeking leave to appeal against the

judgment of acquittal dated 06.12.2022 passed by Third Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act, 2012) District Vidisha (Madhya Pradesh) in Special S.T.No.SC/07/2022, whereby respondent has been acquitted of the charges levelled against him under Sections 363, 366, 376 (3) and Section 376 (2)(n) of IPC and Sections 3/4(2) and Section 5(L)/6(1) of POCSO Act.

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

In the light of the findings of the Trial Court which are based on critical evaluation of the evidence on record, conclusion of acquittal drawn particularly in view of para 18,34,36, 37 and 38 of the impugned judgment is found to be

impregnable, as neither there is any illegality nor irregularity in the findings so recorded.

Accordingly, I.A.No.5938 of 2023 is rejected.

Consequently, present appeal stands dismissed.

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

SANJEEV KUMAR
PHANSE
2023.05.15
11:21:32 +05'30'