STATE Vs. SATISH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition is directed against the order dated 2nd February, 2010 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge in S.C. No. 125 of 2009 discharging the Respondent for offences punishable under Section 306 IPC.

(2.) Learned APP for the State states that the impugned order is illegal, bad in law and passed by the learned trial court without appreciating the evidence placed on record. It is stated that the prosecution witnesses have specifically stated that the Respondent used to beat, thrash and harass the deceased Sonia after consuming liquor and also did not provide money for the household expenditure. There was sufficient material placed by the prosecution before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge to satisfy that a prima facie case is made out against the Respondent. The statement of the Complainant Raj Kumari is clear and cogent wherein she has stated that the Respondent gave up his job and would mercilessly beat the deceased Sonia demanding money for liquor. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge failed to appreciate that the allegations leveled against the Respondent are serious in nature and the present case is covered under Section 107(iii) IPC. Hence, the impugned order passed on the basis of surmises and conjectures is liable to the set aside.

(3.) I have heard learned APP for the State and perused the record.