STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. INDRAJ SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State of Rajasthan has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 8. 1. 2001 passed by learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kotputali, District Jaipur in Criminal Case No. 348/96 by which the accused-respondent has been acquitted from the offence under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304-A, IPC.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that Satyapal Singh, ASI on 13. 7. 1996 lodged an FIR No. 404/96 at police station Kotputali in which he has stated that on that day at about 2. 30 PM, he has received an information from the Medical Jurist that an accident happened in Paniyala village and the injured has taken into hospital. Upon the said information, the ASI proceeded at the spot where he found Maruti RHP 88 and RJ 14g 3950. Driver of Maruti on his seat, one other person and one lady were found in dead condition. Upon the basis of the said incident, a case was registered against the accused respondent for the offence u/s. 279, 337, 338 and 304-A, IPC. After investigation the police has filed challan against the accused-respondent before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kotputali and the learned trial Court has framed charge against the accused respondent for the offence under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304-A, IPC. The charges were read over and explained to the accused-respondent, but he pleaded not guilty and claimed for trial.

(3.) LOOKING to the evidence just discussed above, it can easily be said that the prosecution has not been able to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubts against the accused respondent for the offence for which who has been charged and the learned trial Court was right in acquitting the accused respondent. I have no reason to dissent from the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Court, as they appear to be reasonable and plausible in the facts and circumstances of the case. The learned trial Court has given cogent reason in acquitting the accused respondent. The Court attention was drawn on the following judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court:- Umrao vs. State of Harayana & Ors. SC 2006 Vol. 10 Page 136 in which the Lordships of the Supreme Court has observed in para 26 that "it is now well settled that if two view are possible, the appellate Court should not interfere with the judgment of acquittal passed by the Court below. "