Sheetal Rawat vs State (2023/Rjjd/011761)
2023 Latest Caselaw 3486 Raj

[2023/RJJD/011761]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Crml Leave To Appeal No. 191/2020

Sheetal Rawat D/o Amar Rawat, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Rawatwadi, Ayad, Police Station Bhupalpura, District Udaipur.

----Appellant Versus

1. State, Through Pp

2. Prem Singh Rawat @ Prem Singh S/o Sh. Dhanraj Singh, R/o House No. 03, Rawatpura, Ayad, Police Station Bhupalpura, Dist. Udaipur.

                                                                 ----Respondents


For Appellant(s)          :     Mr. Deepak Menaria
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Abhishek Purohit, AGA



               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

                                     Order

24/04/2023

1. The instant application under Section 372 read with Section

378(4) CrPC has been preferred seeking leave to prefer an appeal

against the judgment dated 05.07.2019 passed by the learned

Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases, No.2, Udaipur in Special

Sessions Case No.135/2018 (CIS No.227/2018), whereby

respondent No.2 has been acquitted from the charge of offences

under Sections 363, 366, 354, 354, 354(C)(D), 342 IPC and

Section 8/12 of the POCSO Act.

2. The application is barred by limitation from 329 days. An

application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been

preferred. Though upon consideration of the submissions made in

application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, I am not

convinced with the reasons assigned for the delay occasioned in

filing the application, still I have gone through the judgment

[2023/RJJD/011761] (2 of 2) [CRLLA-191/2020]

passed by the trial court and considered the submissions

advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant on merits of the

case.

3. The learned trial court after thorough appreciation of the

evidence available on record came to a conclusion that the

prosecution has failed to prove that the victim was a minor as on

the date of the alleged incident. Further on the basis of the letter

(Ex.D/2) and other corroborating circumstances, the learned trial

court concluded that there appears to be a love affair between the

victim and the respondent No.2 and since the parents of the

victim were not agreeable to their relationship, they lodged the

FIR against the respondent, which itself suffers from unexplained

delay. Hence, the learned trial court acquitted the respondent

from the charges giving him benefit of doubt.

4. Upon consideration of the submissions advanced at bar and

on perusal of the judgment of acquittal, this Court is of the opinion

that the trial court was perfectly justified in acquitting the accused

from the charges under Sections 363, 366, 354, 354, 354(C)(D),

342 IPC and Section 8/12 of the POCSO Act and the impugned

judgment does not suffer from any shortcomings, either factual or

legal, so as to call for interference.

5. Accordingly, the instant application seeking leave to appeal is

dismissed as being barred by limitation as well as on merits.

6. Record be returned to the trial court.

(FARJAND ALI),J 166-Pramod/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)