Maghi Devi vs State of Rajasthan

A.M. Kapadia, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner Maghi Devi and verified from the learned Public Prosecutor with regard to filing of leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal recorded by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Bikaner, whereby, Respondent No. 1 Subhash was acquitted for offence u/s 302 Indian Penal Code.

This revision petition has been filed by the mother of the deceased, who was neither the complainant nor she was examined as a witness. though cited by the prosecution as witness No. 10.

We have also perused the record of the case. In this case, the complainant was Jitendra Bothra PW 1, who has turned hostile and deposed before the learned trial Court he did not see any incident of killing his brother Ashok. The other eye-witnesses namely Anand Vyas PW 3, Indra Chand PW 4, Ghanshyam PW 5 and Ratan Lal PW 6 have also stated that they have not seen as to who committed the murder of deceased. The witness of the recovery is Santosh Sharma and he too has been turned hostile.

In view of the above testimony of the eye-witnesses, the learned trial Court has acquitted the accused Respondent on the ground of the case being of no evidence. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a recovery of knife corroborated by the FSL report. But, this is a corroborative evidence. When the eye-witnesses are hostile, the conviction cannot be recorded on the basis of the corroborative evidence.

We, therefore, are unable to agree with the submissions of the learned Counsel for the petitioner.

Accordingly, there is no reason to interfere with the finding of acquittal arrived at by the learned trial Court. Consequently, this revision petition is dismissed summarily.