Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 1]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Rambahori @ Bandar Bhurji on 15 March, 2019

                                                    1                              MCRC-4012-2019
                    The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                              MCRC-4012-2019

(THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs RAMBAHORI @ BANDAR BHURJI) 2 Jabalpur, Dated : 15-03-2019 Shri Prakesh Gupta, learned Panel Lawyer for the petitioner-State. Heard.

This petition seeking leave to appeal under Section 378(3) of Cr.P.C. has been filed arising out of the judgment dated 31.10.2018 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Panna in Registration No. 119/2016 (CNR No. MP3501-004582-2016) acquitting the accused from the charge under Section 4(B)(1) of the Explosive Substance Act, 1908.

On perusal of the finding of the trial court it reveals that recovery of explosive substance, which was made from the alleged house, was not of ownership and possession of the accused. The statement of expert witness Vinay Kumar Tiwari (PW-3) as well as FSL report indicate that the explosive substance, which was recovered, was being used for the firework also. The recovery of the explosive substance has also not been proved by the independent witness. The sample of the explosive substance was not kept in the appropriate custody prior to sending the same for examination. It has also not been proved by the prosecution that the said substance was kept by the accused for any illegal motive.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and looking to the finding of the trial court which is based on appreciation of evidence, it is to be noted here that the incident occurred when the Diwali Festival was to commence, however, looking to the quantity of explosive substance which was recovered and the finding of the trial court, we are not inclined to grant leave against the impugned judgment of acquittal.

Accordingly, this petition stands dismissed and the leave, as prayed, is refused.

    (J.K. MAHESHWARI)                                                      (SMT. ANJULI PALO)
           JUDGE                                                                  JUDGE


rsshukla

Digitally signed by
RAGHVENDRA SHRAN
SHUKLA
Date: 2019.04.23
15:31:27 +05'30'