Tripura High Court
Sri Biplab Roy vs Sita Sarkar & Another Wherein It Has Been ... on 2 August, 2024
Author: T. Amarnath Goud
Bench: T. Amarnath Goud
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
_A_G_A_R_T_A_L_A_
Crl.Rev.P. No.06 of 2023
Sri Biplab Roy
.....Petitioner
_V_E_R_S_U_S_
Sri Rajib Krishna Sharma and Others
.....Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Somik Deb, Sr. Advocate.
Mr. D. Ray Chaudhury, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. P. Roy Barman, Sr. Advocate.
Mr. R. Datta, P.P.
Mr. H. K. Bhowmik, Advocate.
Mr. K. Nath, Advocate.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD
_J_U_D_G_M_E_N_T_ [ORAL]
02.08.2024
The present application has been filed under Section-397 read with
Section-398 and Section-401 of Cr. P.C., 1973 for revision of the judgment dated 5th
March, 2022 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Agartala, West Tripura in
Criminal Appeal No.14 of 2019 dismissing the appeal and upholding the judgment
and order of acquittal dated 1st February, 2019 passed in PRC (WP) No.159 of 2017
under Sections-341/342/384/323/506(1)/34 of IPC.
[2] The facts in brief are that, the petitioner lodged an FIR against the
respondent No.1 to 3 and others which was registered as A.D Nagar PS Case No.
2016/ADN/057 under Section 341/342/384/325/506/34 IPC. After completion of the
investigation, Investigating Officer submitted charge-sheet against the respondents
No.1 to 3 and one Sri Bidhan Das under Section 341/342/384/325/506/34 IPC. The
learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, No.8, Agartala, West Tripura after
completion of trial passed Judgment & Order of acquittal dated 01.02.2019 acquitting
the No.1 to 3 and one Sri Bidhan Das from the charges under Section
341/342/384/325/506(1)/34 IPCNo.1. The State of Tripura preferred an appeal u/s
378(2) of Cr.P.C before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Agartala, West
Tripura against the aforesaid judgment and order of acquittal dated 01.02.2019. The
learned Appellate Court by a Judgment dated 05.03.2022 dismissed the appeal and
affirmed the Judgment & Order of acquittal passed by the Ld. Trial Court.
[3] Hence this revision petition has been preferred before this Court by the
petitioner herein for redress.
[4] Heard both sides.
[5] During argument learned counsel for the respondents has defended the
judgment and order so passed by the trial court. The learned counsel further referring
to the evidence of PW-8 has contended that the incriminating part in the evidence of
PW-8 is that the respondent No. 1 had assaulted the victim with a key chain on the
back side of his head but such statement was not supported by the PW-9 who is the
sole accompanied person of the informant at the time of alleged incident. It is further
continued that the incriminating part as referred to above were neither narrated in the
FIR nor stated by the informant to the police while making statement.
[6] In addition to such argument learned counsel further referred para 45
of a judgment of this Court reported in (2021) 1 TLR 259 titled as Saptam Sarkar VS
Sita Sarkar & Another wherein it has been held thus:
"..........In an appeal from the judgment and order of acquittal, the appellate
court could not have disturbed the finding of acquittal inasmuch, while deciding
an appeal against the acquittal even though the power of appellate court is no less
than the power exercised while hearing appeals against conviction and it can
proceed to appreciate the evidence afresh, but one significant difference is that an
order of acquittal will not be interfered with by an appellate court, where the
judgment of the trial court is based on evidence and the view taken is reasonable
and plausible........."
[7] Learned counsel for the respondents further relied on a judgment of
Hon'ble Apex Court reported in (2007) 4 SCC 415 titled as Chandrappa & Others
VS State of Karnataka wherein at para 42 the Hon'ble Court has laid down certain
general principles regarding powers of the appellate court while dealing with an
appeal against acquittal.
[8] Learned counsel for the petitioner herein, however, contended that the
trial court has not appreciated the evidence on record properly and therefore, the
order of acquittal so recorded by the trial court is perverse, unjustified, unreasonable
and arbitrary. Learned counsel further added that the evidence of PWs 8, 9 and 15
clearly proves the charges and as such the order of acquittal so passed by the trial
court may be set aside and thereby the respondents may be convicted for the charges
as framed by the trial court. Learned counsel appearing for the State has adopted the
submission so placed by learned counsel petitioner.
[9] This Court has carefully gone through the evidence on record. From
the record it emerges that the informant (PW-8) is the victim and PW-9 (Sri Anand
Singh Thakur) is the sole accompanied person of the informant while the informant
was subjected to alleged harassment and assault leading to the charges framed.
Therefore, suffice it to refer to the evidence of PWs-8 and 9. This Court is of the
opinion that only incriminating part in the evidence of PW-8 is that he was assaulted
by the respondent No. 1 with a key chain. Such statement so made in the
examination-in-chief admittedly were not made either in the FIR or while making the
statement to the police. Such evidence can, therefore, be held to be subsequent
development in the prosecution case. It also reveals from the PW-9 who was the sole
accompanied person of the informant did not say anything to show that the informant
was assaulted by any one of the respondents in the manner as stated by the PW-8
(informant).
[10] Having observed the discussions made by both the Courts below, I
am of the considered opinion that the judgment and order of acquittal so passed by
the learned trial court and upheld by the learned Appellate Court do not suffer from
any perversity or illegality and thereby, do not call for any interference. Accordingly,
the present revision petition stands dismissed. As a sequel, miscellaneous application,
pending if any, shall stand closed.
T. AMARNATH GOUD, J
A. Ghosh
ANJAN Digitally signed by
ANJAN GHOSH
GHOSH Date: 2024.08.07
16:21:39 +05'30'
