Skip to content


State of Rajasthan Vs. Ramsingh - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtRajasthan High Court
Decided On
Case NumberCr. A. No. 413/1973
Judge
Reported in1978WLN(UC)294
AppellantState of Rajasthan
RespondentRamsingh
DispositionAppeal dismissed
Excerpt:
.....of age when the juvenile justice act, 2000, came into force - juvenile act, of 2000 has been given retrospective effect by rule 12 of juvenile justice rule, 2007 - as such, accused has to be treated as juvenile under the said act. c. honnia, c.j.1. the accused who was charged under section 394 ipc was acquitted by the trial court on the grounds that there was delay in filing the complaint by six days and that the injury said in have been sustained by the complainants was not proved and independent witnesses, though available, were not examined. the case against the accused was that he committed theft of a camel and the evidence shows that the camel came to the possession of the complainant.2. in these circumstances i find no reason to interfere with the order of acquittal. hence the appeal is dismissed.
Judgment:

C. Honnia, C.J.

1. The accused who was charged Under Section 394 IPC was acquitted by the trial court on the grounds that there was delay in filing the complaint by six days and that the injury said in have been sustained by the complainants was not proved and independent witnesses, though available, were not examined. The case against the accused was that he committed theft of a camel and the evidence shows that the camel came to the possession of the complainant.

2. In these circumstances I find no reason to interfere with the order of acquittal. Hence the appeal is dismissed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //