State Of Chhattisgarh vs Sheikh Afjal 18 Mcrc/4538/2020 Domra ... on 4 August, 2020

[Cites 3, Cited by 1]

Chattisgarh High Court

State Of Chhattisgarh vs Sheikh Afjal 18 Mcrc/4538/2020 Domra ... on 4 August, 2020

Bench: Prashant Kumar Mishra

                                     1
                                                         CRMP No. 904 of 2020


                                                                    NAFR

          HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                         CRMP No. 904 of 2020

    State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Jashpur, District
     Jashpur, Chhattisgarh

                                                          ---- Applicant

                                  Versus

    Sheikh Afjal S/o Sheikh Halim Aged About 20 Years R/o Sai
     Tangartoli Chowki Godam, Police Station Jashpurnagar, District
     Jashpur, Chhattisgarh

                                                       ---- Respondent



For Applicant-State      :-    Mr. K.K. Singh, G.A.


               Proceedings through Video Conferencing


             Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra
               Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya

                              Order On Board
                                    By

                       Prashant Kumar Mishra, J.

04/08/2020

1. On due consideration delay of 217 days in filing of the Cr.M.P. is condoned. Accordingly, I.A. No.01/2020, application for condonation of delay is allowed.

2. The trial Court has acquitted the accused of the charges under Section 395 of the I.P.C. and Sections 25(1B) (a), 27 of the Arms Act,1959.

CRMP No. 904 of 2020

3. The present respondent along with five other unknown persons entered the house of PW-3 Smt. Vidhyawati Singh at about 11 p.m. on 07.08.2017 and looted one mobile set and ₹ 25,000/-. In her diary statement (Ex-D2), PW-3 Smt. Vidhyawati Singh informed the Police that she could not identify the accused persons, however, in her Court statement she identified the accused without offering any explanation as to why she did not inform the Police about identification. Moreover, TI parade was not conducted by the Investigating Officer. PW-2 Jeetaram was the person who knocked at the door of the house of PW-3 Smt. Vidhyawati Singh after which the complainant opened the door but Jeetaram (PW-2) also fails to identify the accused. It is also to be seen that the mobile set recovered from the respondent vide Ex-P10, pursuant to his memorandum statement Ex-P9, was not sent for identification.

4. Considering lack of evidence to establish involvement of the respondent in commission of dacoity, the present is not a fit case for grant of leave to appeal.

5. Accordingly, the present Cr.M.P. deserves to be and is hereby dismissed.

                  SD/-                                      SD/-

         (Prashant Kumar Mishra)                      (Gautam Chourdiya)
                Judge                                       Judge



Ayushi

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Chattisgarh High Court