Madhya Pradesh High Court
The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Azahar Khan @ Ajju on 30 October, 2018
1 MCRC-7391-2018
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-7391-2018
(THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs AZAHAR KHAN @ AJJU)
6
Jabalpur, Dated : 30-10-2018
Shri S.K.Rai, Government Advocate, for the applicant/State.
Heard on the question of admission.
This application for grant of leave to appeal has been filed by the
applicant/State against the judgment of acquittal dated 30/10/2017, passed by
the Special Judge (Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act in Special Case No.117/2016 whereby learned trial Court
acquitted the respondent Azhar Khan alias Ajju from the offence punishable
under Sections 363, 366(A), 376(2)(i) of IPC, Section 4 of POCSO Act and section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act.
Prosecutrix (P.W.10) though in her statement has very categorically admitted that at the time of occurrence, she was below 18 years of age and respondent forcibly committed sexual intercourse with her, but she in Para 5 of her cross-examination has deposed that on 28.11.2016 her statement under section 164 of CrPC was recorded before the Judicial Magistrate First Class vide Ex.P.6 and in the aforesaid statement she has deposed that at the time of occurrence she was 18 years of age and at present she is aged 18 years and 6 months. She in her statement further admitted that she and respondent were known to each other and she with her consent had gone along with respondent and stayed at his relative's place for a period of 12 to 13 days and during the aforesaid period, the respondent with her consent developed physical relations.
Considering the aforesaid admission made by the prosecutrix in Paras 5 and 6 of her cross-examination, the learned trial court came to the conclusion that it is a case of consent and at the time of occurrence she was major above 18 years of age.
On due consideration of the above and the detailed reasoning assigned Digitally signed by TRUPTI GUNJAL Date: 31/10/2018 23:11:54 2 MCRC-7391-2018 by the trial court, we are of the view that the trial court has not committed any error in acquitting the respondent from the alleged offences and the findings of acquittal recorded in favour of the respondent is based on proper appreciation of evidence and do not found to be perversed or contrary to evidence on record.
No case for interference with the order of acquittal, as prayed by the learned counsel for the applicant/State, is made out. However, the application for grant of leave to appeal has no merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
(P.K. JAISWAL) (B. K. SHRIVASTAVA)
JUDGE JUDGE
TG /-
Digitally signed by TRUPTI GUNJAL
Date: 31/10/2018 23:11:54