Rajesh Kumari v. Nepal Singh and Ors

CRR-4936-2016oo o o o o oooo o ooooooo-1-o INoTHEoHIGHoCOURToOFoPUNJABoANDoHARYANAo AToCHANDIGARHo o 238o oo o o o o CRR-4936-2016o o o o o o o DateoofoDecision:o08.05.2023o o RajeshoKumario o o oooooooooo o o o ,Petitionerooo Versuso NepaloSinghoandoOtherso o ooooooo o oooooo ooooo,Respondentso o CORAM:oooHON'BLEoMR.oJUSTICEoJAGMOHANoBANSALo Present:-oo Mr.oS.N.oYadav,oAdvocateoforotheopetitioneroo ***o JAGMOHANoBANSAL,oJ.o(ORAL)o

1.k o Theo petitionero througho instanto petitiono undero Sectiono 401o Codeo ofo Criminalo Procedure,o 1973o (foro shorto 'Cr.P.C.')o iso seekingo settingoasideoofoimpugnedojudgmentodatedo06.10.2016owherebyolearnedo AdditionaloSessionsoJudge,oGurgaonohasoupheldotheojudgmentopassedobyo theoAdditionaloChiefoJudicialoMagistrate,oGurgaonowherebyovideoordero datedo21.03.2014otheorespondentsohaveobeenoacquitted.o

2.k o Theo briefo factso emergingo fromo theo recordo areo thato ono theo complaintoofotheofatheroofotheopetitioneroanoFIRoNo.351odatedo01.05.2002o cameotoobeoregisteredoatoPoliceoStationoCity,oGurgaonounderoSectionso 498-A,o406oIPC.oInotheoFIR,oitowasoallegedothatopetitionerogotomarriedo witho Nepalo Singho ono 20.04.1996o aso pero Hinduo riteso ando ceremonies.o Parentsoofotheopetitionerogaveoenoughodowryoarticlesoandospentoenoughoono theomarriageoceremoniesobutoin-lawsoofotheopetitionerowereonotohappyo witho theo amounto ofo dowryo ando startedo harassingo heroforo noto bringingo CRR-4936-2016oo o o o o oooo o ooooooo-2-o sufficiento dowry.o Ono oneo occasiono theo husbando ofo theo petitionero demandedo Rs.33,000/-.o Wheno petitionero gaveo birtho too ao childo ino theo hospital,o allo theo expenseso wereo borneo byo fathero ofo theo petitioner.o Ono

15.07.2001,otheorespondentotookotheopetitionerotoohisohouse,ohowever,odueo tootheoharassmentocausedobyotheorespondentsosheocameobackoafterotwooando halfomonths.oTheopolice,oafterocompletingoinvestigation,ofiledoitsoreporto undero Sectiono 173.o Learnedo Trialo Courto framedo chargeso againsto theo respondentsoandorecordedoevidenceoofoprosecutionowitnessesoasowelloaso defenceowitnesses.oTheoTrialoCourtoafteroconsideringotheoevidenceoledobyo botho sideo ando documentso ono recordo acquittedo theo respondentso video judgmentodatedo21.03.2014.o

3.k o Theo petitionero feelingo aggrievedo fromo theo judgmento ofo Additionalo Chiefo Judicialo Magistrate,o Gurgaono preferredo ano appealo beforeoSessionsoCourt,oGurgaonowhichocameoupoforoconsiderationobeforeo AdditionaloSessionsoJudge,oGurgaonowhoovideoorderodatedo06.10.2016o dismissedotheoappealoofotheopetitioneroandoupheldotheojudgmentopassedobyo theoTrialoCourt.o

4.k o LearnedocounseloforotheopetitionerosubmitsothatoTrialoCourto hasoacquittedotheorespondentsoonotheogroundothatotheoprosecutionofailedotoo proveoitsocaseobeyondoreasonableoshadowoofodoubtoandothatonoospecifico dateo ando timeo regardingo allegationso areo specified,o however,o ino matrimonialocasesotheooffenceoisocontinuingoinonatureoandoingredientsoofo Sectiono498-AoofoIndianoPenaloCode,o1860o(foroshorto'IPC')owereofullyo CRR-4936-2016oo o o o o oooo o ooooooo-3-o proved,othusoTrialoCourtoandoAppellateoCourtohasoerredoinoacquittingotheo respondents.oItoisofurtherosubmittedothatoallotheoprosecutionowitnessohaveo supportedocaseoofotheopetitioner.o

5.k o Io haveo heardo theo argumentso ofo learnedo counselo foro theo petitioneroandoperusedotheorecord.oo

6.k o Theo petitionero haso invokedo revisionaryo jurisdictiono ofo thiso Court.o Theo scopeo ofo interferenceo whileo exercisingo powero ofo revisiono againstojudgmentoofoacquittaloisoveryolimited.o

6.1o o WhileoadvertingowithoSectiono439oofooldoCriminaloProcedureo CodeowhichoinoitsopresentoavataroisoSectiono401,oaofourojudgeobenchoofo Hon'bleoSupremeoCourtoinoD.oStephensov.oNosibollao1951oSCCo184ohaso held:o "12.oTheorevisionalojurisdictionoconferredoonotheoHigho Courto undero Sectiono 439o ofo theo Codeo ofo Criminalo Procedureo iso noto too beo lightlyo exercised,o wheno ito iso invokedobyoaoprivateocomplainantoagainstoanoorderoofo acquittal,oagainstowhichotheoGovernmentohasoaorightoofo appealounderoSectiono417.oItocouldobeoexercisedoonlyoino exceptionalocasesowhereotheointerestsoofopublicojusticeo requireo interferenceo foro theo correctiono ofoao manifesto illegality,oorotheopreventionoofoaogrossomiscarriageoofo justice.oThisojurisdictionoisonotoordinarilyoinvokedooro usedo merelyo becauseo theo lowero courto haso takeno ao wrongoviewoofotheolawooromisappreciatedotheoevidenceo onorecord."o CRR-4936-2016oo o o o o oooo o ooooooo-4-o

6.2o oo AofourojudgeobenchoofoHon'bleoSupremeoCourtoreiteratingotheo aboveoopinionoinoLogendranathoJhaov.oPolaioLaloBiswaso1951oSCCo856o hasoheld:o "9.o …o Thougho sub-sectiono (1)o ofo Sectiono 439o authorisesotheoHighoCourtotooexercise,oinoitsodiscretion,o anyoofotheopowersoconferredoonoaocourtoofoappealobyo Sectiono423,osub-sectiono(4)ospecificallyoexcludesotheo powero too 'convertoao findingo ofo acquittalo intoo oneo ofo conviction'.oThisodoesonotomeanothatoinodealingowithoao revisionopetitionobyoaoprivateopartyoagainstoanoorderoofo acquittal,otheoHighoCourtocouldoinotheoabsenceoofoanyo erroroonoaopointoofolaw,oreappraiseotheoevidenceoando reverseotheofindingsoofofactsoonowhichotheoacquittalowaso based,o providedo onlyo ito stoppedo shorto ofo findingo theo accusedoguiltyoandopassingosentenceoonohim.oo

10.o Byo merelyo characterisingo theo judgmento ofo theo trialocourtoaso'perverse'oando'lackingoinoperspective',o theo Higho Courto cannoto reverseo pureofindingsoofo facto basedoonotheotrialocourt'soappreciationoofotheoevidenceo inotheocase.oThatoisowhatotheolearnedoJudgeoinotheocourto belowohasodone,obutocouldonot,oinoouroopinion,oproperlyo doo ono ano applicationo ino revisiono filedo byo ao privateo partyoagainstoacquittal".o

6.3o oo Ao threeo judgeo bencho ofo Hon'bleo Supremeo Courto ino K.o ChinnaswamyoReddyov.oStateoofoA.P.o(1963)o3oSCRo412ohasoobserved:o "7.o Ito iso trueo thato ito iso openo too ao Higho Courto ino revisionotoosetoasideoanoorderoofoacquittaloevenoatotheo instanceoofoprivateoparties,othoughotheoStateomayonoto haveothoughtofitotooappeal;obutothisojurisdictionoshouldo CRR-4936-2016oo o o o o oooo o ooooooo-5-o inoouroopinionobeoexercisedobyotheoHighoCourtoonlyoino exceptionalocases,owhenothereoisosomeoglaringodefectoino theoprocedureoorothereoisoaomanifestoerroroonoaopointoofo lawo ando consequentlyo thereo haso beeno ao flagranto miscarriageoofojustice.oSub-sectiono(4)oofoSectiono439o forbidso ao Higho Courto fromo convertingo ao findingo ofo acquittalointoooneoofoconvictionoandothatomakesoitoallo theomoreoincumbentoonotheoHighoCourtotooseeothatoito doesonotoconvertotheofindingoofoacquittalointoooneoofo convictionobyotheoindirectomethodoofoorderingoretrial,o wheno ito cannoto itselfo directlyo converto ao findingo ofo acquittalo intoo ao findingo ofo conviction.o Thiso placeso limitationsoonotheopoweroofotheoHighoCourtotoosetoasideo ao findingo ofo acquittalo ino revisiono ando ito iso onlyo ino exceptionalocasesothatothisopoweroshouldobeoexercised.o Ito iso noto possibleo too layo downo theo criteriao foro determiningosuchoexceptionalocasesowhichowouldocovero allo contingencies.o Weo mayo howevero indicateo someo casesoofothisokind,owhichowouldoinoouroopinionojustifyo theo Higho Courto ino interferingo witho ao findingo ofo acquittaloinorevision.oTheseocasesomayobe:owhereotheo trialocourtohasonoojurisdictionotootryotheocaseobutohaso stilloacquittedotheoaccused,oorowhereotheotrialocourtohaso wronglyo shuto outo evidenceo whicho theo prosecutiono wishedo too produce,o oro whereo theo appealo courto haso wronglyoheldoevidenceowhichowasoadmittedobyotheotrialo courtotoobeoinadmissible,oorowhereomaterialoevidenceo hasobeenooverlookedoeitherobyotheotrialocourtoorobyotheo appealo court,o oro whereo theo acquittalo iso basedo ono ao compoundingoofotheooffence,owhichoisoinvalidounderotheo law.o Theseo ando othero caseso ofo similaro natureo cano properlyo beo heldo too beo caseso ofo exceptionalo nature,o CRR-4936-2016oo o o o o oooo o ooooooo-6-o whereotheoHighoCourtocanojustifiablyointerfereowithoano orderoofoacquittal;oandoinosuchoaocaseoitoisoobviousothato ito cannoto beo saido thato theo Higho Courto waso doingo indirectlyowhatoitocouldonotodoodirectlyoinoviewoofotheo provisionsoofoSectiono439(4).oWeohaveothereforeotooseeo whetherotheoorderoofotheoHighoCourtosettingoasideotheo orderoofoacquittaloinothisocaseocanobeoupheldoonotheseo principles."o

6.4o oo AotwoojudgeobenchoofoHon'bleoSupremeoCourtoafteronoticingo itso previouso judgmentso ino Mahendrao Pratapo Singho v.o Sarjuo Singho

(1968)o2oSCRo287ohasoheld:o "8.o Theopracticeoonotheosubjectohasobeenostatedobyo thisoCourtoonomoreothanooneooccasion.oInoD.oStephenso v.oNosibollao[1951oSCCo184o:oAIRo1951oSCo196o:o1951o SCRo 284]o onlyo twoo groundso areo mentionedo byo thiso Courto aso entitlingo theo Higho Courto too seto asideo ano acquittaloinoaorevisionoandotooorderoaoretrial.oTheyoareo thato thereo musto existo ao manifesto illegalityo ino theo judgmentoofotheoCourtoofoSessionoorderingotheoacquittalo oro thereo musto beo ao grosso miscarriageo ofo justice.o Ino explainingotheseotwoopropositions,othisoCourtofurthero statesothatotheoHighoCourtoisonotoentitledotoointerfereo evenoifoaowrongoviewoofolawoisotakenobyotheoCourtoofo Sessionooroifoevenothereoisomisappreciationoofoevidence.o Again,oinoLogendranathoJhav.oPolaioLaloBiswaso[1951o SCCo856o:oAIRo1951oSCo316o:o1951oSCRo676]othiso Courto pointso outo thato theo Higho Courto iso entitledo ino revisionotoosetoasideoanoacquittaloifothereoisoanoerroroono aopointoofolawooronooappraisaloofotheoevidenceoatoall.o ThisoCourtoobservesothatoitoisonotosufficientotoosayothato CRR-4936-2016oo o o o o oooo o ooooooo-7-o theojudgmentounderorevisionoiso'perverse'ooro'lackingo inotrueocorrectoperspective'.oItoisopointedooutofurthero thatobyoorderingoaoretrial,otheodiceoisoloadedoagainsto theo accused,o becauseo howevero mucho theo Higho Courto mayocautionotheosubordinateocourt,oitoisoalwaysodifficulto toore-weighotheoevidenceoignoringotheoopinionoofotheo HighoCourt.oAgainoinoK.oChinnaswamyoReddyov.oStateo ofoA.P.[AIRo1962oSCo1788o:o(1963)o3oSCRo412]oitoiso pointedo outo thato ano interferenceo ino revisiono witho ano ordero ofo acquittalo cano onlyo takeo placeo ifo thereo iso ao glaringodefectoofoprocedureosuchoasothatotheoCourtohado noojurisdictionotootryotheocaseoorotheoCourtohadoshutoouto someo materialo evidenceo whicho waso admissibleo oro attemptedotootakeointooaccountoevidenceowhichowasonoto admissibleoorohadooverlookedosomeoevidence.oAlthougho theolistogivenobyothisoCourtoisonotoexhaustiveoofoallotheo circumstancesoinowhichotheoHighoCourtomayointerfereo witho ano acquittalo ino revisiono ito iso obviouso thato theo defecto ino theo judgmento undero revisiono musto beo analogousotoothoseoactuallyoindicatedobyothisoCourt".o o

7.k o TheoHon'bleoSupremeoCourtoinoaocatenaoofojudgmentsowhileo dealingo witho scopeo ando powerso ofo theo appellate/revisionaryo courtso ino dealingo witho ano appeal/revisiono againsto ano ordero ofo acquittalo haso elucidated:oo

(i)oo Ano appellateo courto haso fullo powero too review,o reappreciateoandoreconsiderotheoevidenceouponowhicho theoorderoofoacquittaloisofounded.o

(ii)ooo Theo Codeo ofo Criminalo Procedure,o 1973o putso noo CRR-4936-2016oo o o o o oooo o ooooooo-8-o limitation,orestrictionooroconditionoonoexerciseoofosucho poweroandoanoappellateocourtoonotheoevidenceobeforeoito mayo reacho itso owno conclusion,o botho ono questionso ofo factoandoofolaw.o

(iii)oo Variouso expressions,o sucho as,o 'substantialo ando compellingo reasons',o 'goodo ando sufficiento grounds',o 'veryo strongo circumstances',o 'distortedo conclusions',o 'glaringo mistakes',o etc.o areo noto intendedo too curtailo extensiveo powerso ofo ano appellateo courto ino ano appealo againstoacquittal.oSuchophraseologiesoareomoreoinotheo natureo ofo 'flourisheso ofo language'o too emphasiseo theo reluctanceo ofo ano appellateo courto too interfereo witho acquittalo thano too curtailo theo powero ofo theo courto too reviewotheoevidenceoandotoocomeotooitsoownoconclusion.o

(iv)oo Anoappellateocourt,ohowever,omustobearoinomindothatoino caseoofoacquittal,othereoisodoubleopresumptionoinofavouro ofotheoaccused.oFirstly,otheopresumptionoofoinnocenceoiso availableo too himo undero theo fundamentalo principleo ofo criminalo jurisprudenceo thato everyo persono shallo beo presumedotoobeoinnocentounlessoheoisoprovedoguiltyobyo ao competento courto ofo law.o Secondly,o theo accusedo havingo securedo hiso acquittal,o theo presumptiono ofo hiso innocenceo iso furthero reinforced,o reaffirmedo ando CRR-4936-2016oo o o o o oooo o ooooooo-9-o strengthenedobyotheotrialocourt.o

(v)o Ifotwooreasonableoconclusionsoareopossibleoonotheobasiso ofotheoevidenceoonorecord,otheoappellateocourtoshouldo notodisturbotheofindingoofoacquittalorecordedobyotheotrialo court.o

8.k oo Ino theo presento case,o theo respondento filedo divorceo petitiono undero Sectiono 13o ofo Hinduo Marriageo Act,o 1955o whicho cameo too beo allowedo byo theo Familyo Court.o Theo petitionero ando hero fathero appearedo beforeotheoFamilyoCourtodeposedothatopetitioneroisonotoreadyotoostayoino villageo witho respondento hereino ando heo shouldo shifto too Gurgaono oro Dharuhera.oTheopetitioneroisoallegingothatorespondentoisodemandingocaro andoflatoinoGurgaonowhereasostatementsoofopetitioneroandoherofatheroareo indicatingothatotheyowereocompellingorespondentotooshiftotooGurgaon.oTheo petitionerohasofurtheroallegedothatorespondentowasodemandingoaocaroaso wello aso ploto ino Gurugram.o Ito haso comeo ono recordo thato thereo waso noo demandoofocaroandoplotopriorotooandoatotheotimeoofomarriage.oAsopero petitioner,odemandoofocarowasoraisedowithino10odaysofromomarriage.oItoiso highlyounbelievableothatoaopersonodidonotoraiseodemandobeforeooroatotheo timeo ofo marriageo buto heo raisedo demando withino 10o dayso ofo marriageo especiallyowhenoinoIndianocultureofirstomonthoisoalmostospentoinoenjoyingo theo ceremonies.o Theo findingso recordedo byo theo Trialo Courto aso wello aso AppellateoCourtoquaodemandoofoRs.33,000/-oareoalsooconvincing.oItoseemso CRR-4936-2016oo o o o o oooo o ooooooo-10-o eveno otherwiseo intriguingo thato ao mano ono theo oneo hando iso demandingo Rs.33,000/-oandoonotheoother,oheoisodemandingocaroplusoplotoinoGurgaon.oo oo o TheofindingsorecordedobyotheoTrialoCourtoasowelloasoAppellateo Courto quao allegationso ofo petitionero seemo too beo reasonableo aso wello aso convincing.o Thereo seemso noo reasono too formo ano opiniono contraryo too opinionoformedobyobothotheoCourtsobelow.ooo

9.k o Ino viewo ofo theo aboveo narratedo facts,o havingo regardo too theo findingsorecordedobyoTrialoCourtoasowelloasoAppellateoCourtoincludingo acceptedolegaloposition,othisoCourtoisoofotheoconsideredoopinionothatoinotheo caseoatohandothereoisonooinfirmityooroirregularityoinotheoimpugnedoordero wherebyo Trialo Courto haso acquittedo theo respondento ando ordero ofo theo AppellateoCourtowherebyoappealoofotheopetitionerohasobeenodismissed.o Accordingly,othisoCourtofullyoagreesowithotheofindingorecordedobyoTrialo Courto ando Appellateo Court.o Theo impugnedo judgmento ando ordero beingo speaking,o basedo upono correcto appreciationo ofo facts,o applicableo lawo &o judicialo precedentso ando well-reasonedo needso noo interferenceo ofo thiso Court.oo o o o (JAGMOHANoBANSAL)o ooo o o o o o o o o ooooooJUDGEoo

08.05.2023o MohitoKumaro o Whetherospeaking/reasonedo Yes/Noo Whetheroreportableo Yes/Noo o