Suresh Prasad Mochi @ Suresh … vs State Of Bihar on 6 April, 2011

0
57
Patna High Court
Suresh Prasad Mochi @ Suresh … vs State Of Bihar on 6 April, 2011
Author: Smt. Anjana Prakash
                      Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.294 OF 1994
                    [Appeal against the judgment and order dated
                    31.8.1994 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge
                    XII, Patna in Sessions Trial No.635 of 1991]

          SURESH PRASAD MOCHI @ SURESH PRASAD S/O KESHO LAL,
          RESIDENT OF MOHALLA HATI KHANA, P.S. DINAPUR, DISTRICT
          PATNA                          .......................... Appellant
                           Versus
           THE STATE OF BIHAR                  .............. Respondent

                    For the Appellant : Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate
                    For the Respondent : Mr. J. K. Singh, Addl. P.P.
                                          ---------

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH

Anjana The appellant has been convicted u/s. 366 I.P.C. and
Prakash, J:

sentenced to R.I. for three years by a judgment dated

31.8.1994 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge XII, Patna

in Sessions Trial No.635 of 1991.

The case of the prosecution is that the informant

suspected that his grand daughter, who did not come back after

the call of nature, had been kidnapped by the accused persons

including the appellant.

During trial the prosecution has examined five

witnesses in all. Out of whom, P.W.1 has merely stated that the

alleged victim was in her Sasural and has three children. He

has no doubt proved the Exhibit 2, which is the statement of the

victim recorded u/s.164 Cr.P.C. but the same is inadmissible in

view of the fact that the victim herself has not been examined.
-2-

P.W.2, P.W.3 and P.W.4 are the sons and wife of the informant

respectively, whereas P.W.2 and P.W.3 are not material

witnesses and P.W.4 has been tendered. P.W.5 is an

Advocate’s Clerk, who has proved the case diary. The

Investigating officer has not been examined in this case.

On going through the evidence on record, I find that in

fact this is a case of no evidence and apart from the vague

suspicion that the victim had been kidnapped by the accused

persons, there is no cogent proof of the same.

In the result, this appeal is allowed and the order of

conviction and sentence passed against the appellant on

31.8.1994 by the Additional Sessions Judge XII, Patna in

Sessions Trial No.635 of 1991 is set aside.

( Anjana Prakash, J. )

Patna High Court
Dated, 6th April, 2011.
NAFR/ Narendra/

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *