Orissa High Court
Dhruba Charan Padhi vs Madhusudan Das And Ors. on 20 June, 1997
Equivalent citations: 1997(II)OLR90
Author: P.K. Misra
Bench: P.K. Misra
JUDGMENT P.K. Misra, J.
1. In this appeal the complainant assails the order of acquittal of the six respondents who were charged under Sections 352/379/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. It is alleged by the complainant that while he was returning from Marsaghai Market with 40 Kgs. of rice on 10.4.1983 at about 7 P.M. the accused persons used criminal force against him and accused Sankarsan took away 40 Kgs. of rice and accused Ashok took away Rs. 20/- in furtherance of common intention of all the accused persons. The complaint was filed on the next date.
3. The plea of the accused persons was one of denial and it was pleaded that a false case had been filed as there was enmity between the complainant and the accused persons.
4. The trial Court Has discarded the case of the complainant mainly on the ground that the Complainat could have approached the police station specially on the background of series of litigations pending between the parties. It also found there are some contradictions in the evidence of witnesses.
5. In this appeal the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant submitted that there is no bar for an aggrieved person to approach directly by filing a complaint petition. It is further submitted that the so called contradictions found by the trial Court are very insignificant and should have been ignored. He submits that the approach of the trial Court appears to be illegal and the order of acquittal should be set aside.
6. Apart from examining himself as P.W. 1, the complainant examined P.Ws.2 and 3, the two co-villagers, who allegedly saw the occurrence while they had gone near the place of occurrence to answer the call of nature. Another witness named in the petition, has been examined by the accused persons as P.W. 1 who has stated that there was no such occurrence as alleged. It is admitted that accused Sankarsan and Ashok are the brothers of complainant and accused Suresh and Manguli are respectively the brothers-in-law of accused Sankarsan and Ashok. It is further admitted that a civil suit has been filed by the complainant against his brothers Sankarsan and Ashok and another civil suit has been filed against the complainant by his mother. Thus, as observed by the trial Court, there was admitted enmity between the complainant and the principal accused persons.
7. Though some of the reasons ascribed by the trial Court for discarding the prosecution case, prima facie appear to be flimsy bordering on the boundary of perversity, since the dispute was between the two relations and the alleged occurrence took place more then a decade back, it would not be in the interest of justice to reopen the matter at this distant length of time. Keeping in view the nature of allegations, instead of delving deep into the matter, I rest content by observing that the order of acquittal does not require interference.
The Criminal Appeal is accordingly dismissed.