2026:JHHC:11247 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Acq. Appeal No.05 of 2022 ---- Sunita Kumari, aged about 28 years, daughter of Pandel Hansda, Resident of Village Kokramilik, P.O Gajhanda, P.S. Kukra Milik, District Godda …. …. Appellant(s) -Versus- 1. Shambhu Prasad Singh, aged about 70 years, son of Late Dasrath Singh 2. Subodh Kumar Singh, aged about 57 years, son of Late Deep Narayan Singh 3. Gopal Singh, aged about 44 years, son of Late Deep Narayan Singh All are resident of Village-Mouza-Kaukra, P.O + P.S. Belbadda, District Godda 4. The State of Jharkhand …. …. Respondent(s) ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR ---- For the Appellant : Mrs. Rajni Singh, Adv. For the State : Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, A.P.P For the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : Mr. Purnendu Kumar Jha, Adv. ---- 10/Dated: 18th April, 2026 1. Heard learned counsels for the parties. 2. The present acquittal appeal has been filed against the judgment of acquittal dated 22.01.2022 passed by the learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-1st-Cum-Special Judge, Godda in SC/ST Case No.36 of 2017, arising out of Meharma P.S. Case No.222 of 2013, corresponding to G.R Case No.1691 of 2013 whereby and whereunder the accused were acquitted for the charges under Sections 323 & 354/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act and Sections 3(I)(X) of the SC/ST Act by the Trial Court. 3. From perusal of the records, it appears that on the basis of complaint, P.C.R Case No.488 of 2012 has been filed by the complainant namely, Marangmai Kisku. Upon such complaint, the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Godda, Meharma P.S. Case No.222 of 2023 dated 21.09.2013 has been registered. After investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted under Sections 323, 354/34 I.P.C and under Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(i)(x) of the SC/ST Act. Thereafter, the learned Special Court has taken cognizance and charge have been framed under Sections 323, 354/34 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3 (x) SC/ST Act. Although, several opportunity have 2026:JHHC:11247 Page No.2 Acq. Appeal No.05 of 2022 been given to her, but the complainant has failed to appear for examination before the learned Trial Court. The order dated 22.01.2022 passed by the Special Judicial Magistrate, Godda in S.C/S.T Case No.36 of 2017 is relevant which is quoted hereinbelow:- “िदनांक 14.12 2018 से आरोप गठन उपराȶ पयाŊɑ समय अिभयोजन को साƙ Ůˑुत करने हेतु िदया गया। गवाहों पर सʃन, जमानतीय व अजामनतीय अिधपƗ भी जारी िकये गये। S.P. को पũ िनगŊत कर सािƗयों की उपİ̾थित होने हेतु िलखा गया, िकȶु सभी Ůयास के उपराȶ के वल दो साƗी Ůˑुत िकए गये। यह आवेदन िनणŊय की ितिथ को संचािलत कर िवलɾ करने का Ůयास है, Ɛोंिक कोई कारण नहीं बताया गया िक साƗी समय पर परीिƗत Ɛों नहीं कराये गये। अतः Ɋायिहत मŐ आवेदन खाįरज िकया जाता है । वाद िनणŊय हेतु पुकारा गया। अिभयुƅगण अपने अिधवƅा के साथ Ɋायालय मŐ उपİ̾थत Šए। वाद मŐ िनणŊय V.C. के माȯम से पाįरत िकया गया जो कु ल सात पुʿों मŐ टंिकत अिभलेख के साथ अलग से संलư है। अिभयुƅों को िनदŖष पाकर įरहा िकया गया। अिभयुƅों एवं उनके जमानतदारों को बंधक के दाियȕ से मुƅ िकये गये। कायाŊलय िनयमानुसार अिभलेख अिभलेखगार मŐ जमा करŐ। 4. It further appears that the present appeal has been filed by one of the persons claiming herself to be an injured witness, but she has not get herself examined in the Trial Court. 5. In view of the above discussion, this Court finds that dismissal of the complaint petition does not require any interference by this Court. Accordingly, the present acquittal appeal is hereby, disposed of. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) Dated: 18th April, 2026 Raja/- Uploaded