Samiun Nisha v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 970 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1182 Year-2004 Thana- West Champaran Complaint DistrictWest Champaran ====================================================== Samiun Nisha, wife of Mojibur Rahman, Resident of village - Bhogari, Police Station - Majhaulia, District - West Champaran at Bettiah. ... ... Appellant

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Noor Hoda @ Nurul Hoda, Son of Late Abdur Rahman, Resident of village - Gurchurwa, Police Station - Majhaulia, District - West Champaran at Bettiah.

... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur Mr. Md.Imteyaz Ahmad For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR) 4.

04-10-2017 Heard Sri Ajay Thakur, learned counsel assisted by Mr. Md. Imteyaz Ahmad, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Dilip Kumar Sinha, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.

2. The present appeal has been preferred against judgment of acquittal dated 30-05-2017 passed by Sri Om Prakash, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court - II, Bettiah (hereinafter referred to as the 'Trial Judge') in Sessions Trial No. 93 of 2009, arising out of Complaint Case No. 1182C of 2004. By the said judgment, learned Trial Judge has acquitted respondent no. 2 from the charge under Section

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.970 of 2017(4) dt.04-10-2017 2/3 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Short fact of the case is that initially, on the basis of fardbeyan of the appellant, an F.I.R., vide Majhaulia P.S. Case No. 284 of 2003, was lodged for offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, in which, it was alleged that while she was going with younger brother of her husband, she was intercepted by the respondent no. 2 and other two accused persons and forcibly, he committed rape. Besides alleging that she was raped by respondent no. 2, she had alleged that she was also raped by other two accused persons.

4. After investigation, police found the case as false and submitted final report. In the meanwhile, a protest petition was filed, which was treated as complaint case and thereafter, it was numbered as Complaint Case No. 1182C of 2004.

5. On going through the impugned judgment, it is evident that learned Trial Judge had noticed that the appellant/complainant was second wife of one Mojibur Rahman, with whom earlier daughter of respondent no. 2 was married and thereafter, Mojibur Rahman solemnised marriage with the appellant Samiun Nisha. After examining the evidence, it was noticed by the learned Trial Judge that the present proceeding was falsely initiated against respondent no. 2 and

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.970 of 2017(4) dt.04-10-2017 3/3 after discussing entire evidence, the learned Trial Judge has passed the impugned judgment.

6. Though, learned counsel for the appellant tried to persuade the Court that judgment impugned is liable to be interfered with, however; on examination of the impugned judgment and materials available on record, we do not find any apparent perversity in the judgment requiring interference.

7. Accordingly, there is no ground for entertaining the leave petition i.e. I.A. No. 1736 of 2017, which has been filed under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and it stands dismissed. Consequently, the appeal against acquittal too is dismissed.

(Rakesh Kumar, J.) ( Mohit Kumar Shah, J.) anay U T