IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Acq. Appeal (D.B.) No. 10 of 2021
------
Sahin Praween wife of Guljar Khan, resident of village- Kheskari, P.O. and
P.S. Jai Nagar, District- Koderma. …. Appellant(s)
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Azad Khan, son of Geyas Khan, resident of village- Kheskari, P.O. And
P.S.-Jai Nagar, District- Koderma. ….Respondent(s)
------
CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
: SRI GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
------
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Ashim Kr. Sahani, Advocate.
For the State : Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, A.P.P.
For resp. Nos. : M/s Pandey Neeraj Rai, Advocates.
------
09/31.07.2024: Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. This is an appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated
11.7.2016 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Koderma In Sessions
Trial No. 10/2014, whereby the accused has been acquitted for allegedly
committing the offence punishable under Sections 341, 342, 366 and 376
of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that being the
victim, the appellant has filed this appeal against the judgment of acquittal.
He further submits that the victim was raped by the accused which fact
has also been supported in deposition, but the same has not been
properly appreciated by the learned Trial Court, thus, she has filed this
appeal.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-
accused produces a copy of order dated 12.3.2018 passed in Acquittal
Appeal (DB) No. 16 of 2017 and submits that against the same judgment
of acquittal passed in Sessions Trial No. 10/2014 by the learned Sessions
Judge, Koderma, the State had preferred the said Acquittal appeal. After
considering the evidence and hearing the parties, the appeal being
Acquittal Appeal (DB) No. 16/2017 was dismissed, meaning thereby, the
judgment of acquittal has been upheld.
5. After hearing the parties, we have gone through the order
dated 12.3.2018 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Acquittal
Appeal (DB) No. 16/2017. In the said Acquittal Appeal, the State has
challenged the judgment of acquittal of the accused (respondent No. 2
herein) passed in Sessions Trial No. 10/2014 by the Sessions Judge,
Koderma.
6. After considering all the aspects, the Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court has held that there is no illegality or infirmity in the judgment of
acquittal of the accused-respondent No. 2, thus the leave was not granted.
The said order is a reasoned order. Thus, when a Co-ordinate Bench of
this Court has already dismissed the leave application to prefer an appeal
holding that there is no illegality or infirmity in the judgment of acquittal,
hearing this appeal would mean reviewing the order dated 12.3.2018
passed in Acquittal Appeal (DB) No. 16 of 2017, which this Court does not
have the jurisdiction.
7. In that view, we find no merit in this acquittal appeal.
Accordingly, the same is dismissed.
(ANANDA SEN, J.)
(GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)
Anu/-Cp3
2.