POONAM BANSAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant application under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Cr.P.C.' for short), has been filed by the applicant, seeking leave to file appeal against the judgement of acquittal dated 26.5.2012, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala.

(2.) The complainant Poonam Bansal, applicant-herein, moved an application to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patiala, for registration of a criminal case against respondents no.2 and 3 alongwith their third co-accused Tarlok Kumar, alleging that she was married to Rattan Lal Bansal S/o Manohar Lal Bansal. She was cheated by the accused persons by hatching a criminal conspiracy. For the sake of brevity and to avoid repetition, it would be appropriate to refer to the facts noted by the learned trial court, in para 2 of its judgement dated 16.4.2011 and the same read as under :-

(3.) The appellate court should always keep in mind that the trial court had the distinct advantage of watching the demeanour of the witnesses. The trial court is in a better position to evaluate the credibility of the witnesses.