ARJAN BIBI Vs. MD AJIJ MOIIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule is directed against an order of acquittal of the opposite parties who were tried by a learned Judicial Magistrate of Diamond Harbour for offences punishable under Sections 147, 448, 427 and 323 I.P.C. The alleged incident took place on the 6th April, 1976, when according to the prosecution, the accused persons formed an unlawful assembly and had broken the, kitchen of the complainant and on protest had assaulted her. The learned Magistrate on consideration of the evidence has found that the case of the prosecution was not proved beyond reasonable doubt because no injury report was produced nor the broken articles of the demolished kitchen was seized by the police. The learned Magistrate has also observed that there was no ingredient of the offences punishable under Section 147 or 448 I.P.C.

(2.) On hearing the learned Advocates of both the parties and on perusal of the record of proceedings before the learned Magistrate, it appears that there is indeed no ingredient of the offences punishable under Section 147 or 448 I.P.C. The learned Magistrate seems to have taken the view that the allegation of assault was not satisfactorily corroborated in the absence of the injury report and also because of the non-examination of the Investigating Officer while the offence punishable under Section 427 I.P.C. was not satisfactorily made out as the broken articles were not seized. Incidentally it may be also noted that the F.I.R. lodged by the complainant was also not, proved before the learned Magistrate. In this state of the record if the court below took the view that the incident was not proved beyond reasonable doubt, it cannot be said that there was any manifest error of law resulting in flagrant miscarriage of justice so as to call for interference in revision by this court. Furthermore, it is not considered to be a fit case to upset an order of acquittal recorded more than, six years ago in respect of an alleged incident which had taken place more than 13 years ago.

(3.) For reasons stated above, the Rule is discharged.