STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Vs. RAM BHAROS RAJWADE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved with the judgment of acquittal dated 15-7-2008 passed by Session Judge, Surguja in Session Trial No.232/2007, the State has filed this appeal with the leave of the Court.

(2.) CASE of the prosecution, in brief, is as under: On 10-4-2007, a pooja (worship) was performed at the house of Nanduram Rajwade (PW-2 - injured) at Village Binkara, in which, his son Shrilal Rajwade (PW-1), his brother-in-law Dashrath Rajwade (PW-7), his neighboured Ravindranath (PW-3), Ghuranram, Santhuram, Vijay and his nieces Urmila and Rameshwari were also present. In order to immerse worshipped material, at about 10:30 P.M., they went towards Chulhat Nala situated at Nawapara Korja. They were carrying torch and Lalten (Lantern). Land of the respondent is situated near the Chulhat Nala. Armed with a Tangi (Axe), the respondent came there and assaulted Nanduram (PW-2) with the Tangi and gave him 2-3 Tangi blows. Nanduram (PW-2) sustained injuries over his neck and right hand and he fell down. Thereafter, the respondent fled from there. Nanduram (PW-2) was taken to Holy Cross Hospital, Ambikapur and was admitted there. Dr. Smt. Rachna Arthar (PW-6) admitted Nanduram (PW-2) in the hospital and examined hflf

(3.) SHRI Akhil Mishra, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the State/appellant, argued that the trial Court did not properly appreciate the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. Mere non-mention of the name of the respondent in the Bed-Head Ticket (Ex.P-7) as such is not sufficient ipso facto to discard the prosecution case. The trial Court acquitted the respondent on the grounds of delay in lodging the FIR (Ex.P-1) and belated recording of the case-diary statement of Nanduram (PW-2). He further argued that Shrilal (PW-1) and Dashrath (PW-7) supported the evidence of Nanduram (PW-2). Their evidence is also supported by medical evidence. Therefore, the impugned judgment of acquittaFis not sustainable in the eyes of law. The appeal deserves to be allowed.