Jharkhand High Court
State Of Jharkhand Through Dy ... vs Santosh Kumar Tiwary Alias Bom Bhola ... on 29 August, 2017
Author: H. C. Mishra
Bench: H.C. Mishra, Ananda Sen
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Acquittal Appeal (DB) No.51 of 2016
with
I.A. No.8487 of 2016
with
I.A. No.8488 of 2016
State of Jharkhand through
Deputy Commissioner, Jamtara .... Appellant
Versus
1. Santosh Kumar Tiwary
@ Bom Bhola Tiwary
2. Chandan Ojha
3. Ajay Singh
4. Chhatu
@ Chhotu Ram Gour .... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN
For the Appellants : Mr. Nagmani Tiwari, Advocate
For the State : APP
-----
2/29.08.2017Heard learned counsel for the appellant State.
2. The appellant-State is aggrieved by the Judgment dated 27 th April 2016, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jamtara, in S.T. No.77 of 2015, whereby, the accused respondents No.1 to 4, who had faced the trial for the offences under Sections 364-A, 120-B, 323 of the Indian Penal Code, have been acquitted after trial.
3. This appeal has been filed after a delay of 141 days, for condonation of which, I.A. No.8487 of 2016 has been filed. Another I.A. No.8488 of 2016 has been filed for seeking leave for filing the appeal against the Judgment of acquittal.
4. The impugned Judgment shows that though in the FIR, there is allegation against the accused respondents, including the respondent Santosh Kumar Tiwary @ Bom Bhola Tiwary to have abducted the informant and to have snatched his ATM card, from which, Rs.40,000/- was taken by the accused persons, but it appears from the evidence on record that no witness has supported the prosecution case. Even PW-4, Suresh Rajak, the informant of the case, has stated that at the time of occurrence, he was going along with the accused Santosh Kumar Tiwary @ Bom Bhola Tiwari, when he was abducted by 6 to 7 persons, who had covered their faces. Subsequently, he was also released by the accused persons, and when he was released, said Bom Bhola Tiwary was again with him. He had not identified the other accused respondents in the Court and was declared hostile on the point of identification. On the basis of the evidence brought on record, the Trial Court below has acquitted all the respondents, and in our considered view, rightly so.
5. Upon going through the impugned Judgment, we are actually at a loss, as to why, this acquittal appeal has been filed by the State. Seven witnesses have been examined by the prosecution in the Court below and none of the witnesses, -2- including the informant, have supported the prosecution case and still the State has chosen to file this appeal against the Judgment of acquittal. Neither do we find any valid ground for granting leave to appeal against the Judgment of Acquittal passed by the Trial Court below, nor there is any valid ground for condonation of delay of 141 days in filing the appeal. As such, both these interlocutory applications are dismissed. Consequently, this acquittal appeal is also dismissed being bereft of any merit and being hopelessly barred by limitation.
6. Upon going through the record, we are surprised, as to why, this acquittal appeal has been filed by the appellant-State. The action, on the part of the State in filing this appeal, is highly deprecated and we warn the appellant State, not to file such type of frivolous appeals, which only kill the valuable time of the Court. Indeed filing of such appeals is also against the litigation policy of the State Government. It is made clear that, in case, we come across any such type of appeals in future, we shall not hesitate in imposing heavy cost against the State.
7. Let a copy of this Order be sent to the Chief Secretary of the State as well as the Principal Secretary, Department of Law, State of Jharkhand, for needful and for being careful in future in filing such appeals.
(H. C. Mishra, J.) (Ananda Sen, J.) R.Kumar