The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Rahul
2024 Latest Caselaw 21462 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Rahul on 7 August, 2024

                                                              1                            CRA-9711-2022
                              IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT INDORE
                                                        BEFORE
                                      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
                                                  ON THE 7 th OF AUGUST, 2024
                                               CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 9711 of 2022
                                               THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                           Versus
                                                          RAHUL
                           Appearance:
                                   Shri Rajesh Joshi - Govt. Advocate for the applicant/State.

                                   Shri Anuj Bhargava, counsel for the Respondent.

                                                               ORDER

This is an application under section 378(3) Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of State seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 15.06.2022 passed in Spl. S.T.NO.19/2021 by Special Judge, POCSO Act, Badnagar, district Ujjain whereby the respondent Rahul has been acquitted of the charge under sections 363, 366 of IPC and section 11(iv) r/w 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

2. Heard learned counsel for applicant/State and counsel for the

respondent/accused.

3. Conclusion of acquittal drawn in favour of the respondent is based on due appreciation of evidence particularly in view of paragraph 29 to 31 of the impugned judgment, appears to be reasonable and plausible based on proper appreciation of evidence. The judgment and the reasoning thereof is not manifestly illegal or perverse to make out a case of miscarriage of

2 CRA-9711-2022 justice. The judgment is impregnable as neither there is any illegality nor irregularity in the findings so recorded. Therefore, no substantial reasons for interference by this appellate Court and for grant of leave to appeal, is made out.

4. Consequently, the present application for grant of leave to appeal stands dismissed.

(BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI) JUDGE

MK