AJIT SINGH Vs. JASLEEN BHALLA @ SONU AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE this judgment, above mentioned two applications would be disposed of. Vide Criminal Miscellaneous -A -379 -MA of 2012, complainant has sought permission for grant of leave to appeal whereas, vide CRM -A -637 -MA of 2012, State has sought grant of leave to file an appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 20.03.2012. Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 23.08.2009, complainant Ajit Singh had gone to meet her friend Ekta in her house. On some issue, quarrel took place between them. Ekta made a phone call to the police. Four officials from Police Post Model Town came to her house. Complainant was threatened that he would be involved in a rape case. Complainant was made to sign two blank papers and thumb mark another one. Complainant handed over Rs. 6,00,000/ - in cash, one gold chain along with locket and one gold ring to the police. All the said Articles were given to Sonu Bhalla (owner of Bhalla Jewellers). Complainant prayed that his articles be returned to him. On the basis of statement made by the complainant, formal FIR No. 206 dated 22.09.2010 was registered under Section 7/3 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 at Police Station SVB Ambala. After completion of investigation and necessary formalities, challan was presented in the Court. Vide the impugned judgment, Trial Court acquitted the respondents/accused of the charges framed against them. Hence, the present applications by the State as well as by the complainant.

(2.) I have heard learned State counsel as well as counsel for the complainant and have gone through the record available on the file carefully.

(3.) THUS , the reasons given by the trial court, while acquitting the respondents of the charges framed against them are sound reasons. Learned counsel for the applicant has failed to point out any misreading of evidence on record by the trial Court which would warrant interference by this Court.