VIJAY BISHNOI,J. - (1.) THIS leave to appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 30.6.2012 passed by the Sessions Judge, Jodhpur Metropolitan whereby the learned trial court has acquitted the accused-respondent from the charges punishable for offence under Sections 302/120-B and 201/120-B I.P.C. The learned Public Prosecutor has argued that the learned trial court has grossly erred in disbelieving the statements of Jarina (PW 1) and Raisa (PW 5). Both the witnesses have categorically stated before the Court that the accused-respondent has confessed before them that she entered into conspiracy with co-accused Sheru alias Moda and Shikander alias Sikiya and killed her husband Mohd. Yusuf.
(2.) LEARNED Public Prosecutor has further stated that the learned trial court has also not appreciated the evidence of Mohd. Idris (PW 10), who specifically stated that the relations of accused respondent and the deceased Mohd. Yusuf were not cordial and from those statements, it is clear that the accused- respondent has all the reasons to eliminate Mohd. Yusuf and as such the motive is very well proved in the case. We have examined the evidence available on record and the judgment impugned. So far as Jarina (PW 1) and Raisa (PW 5) are concerned, they have stated in their statements that on the day of murder of Mohd. Yusuf i.e. on 23.3.2011, they visited the house of accused respondent Salma alias Pinnu and she confessed before them that she along with Sheru alias Moda and Sikander alias Sikiya, killed her husband Mohd. Yusuf. However, from the perusal of Ex.D/1 and Ex.D/3, it is clear that the police has recorded their statements on 29.3.2011 and on that day only Jarina (PW 1) and Raisa (PW 5) have stated about the alleged confession of accused-respondent. It is pertinent to note here that for almost 6 days i.e. from 23rd March, 2011 to 29th March, 2011 both the witnesses have not informed anybody in the family about the confession of accused-respondent and this fact itself creates doubt on the testimony of Jarina (PW 1) and Raisa (PW 5). Though in his statement, Mohd. Idris (PW 10) has stated that he was informed about the alleged confession of accused-respondent by Jarina (PW 1) and Raisa (PW 5) but in Police statements, Ex.D/2, the same is missing. Jarina (PW 1) is sister of deceased's mother and Raisa (PW 5) and Mohd. Idris (PW 10) are real sister and brother of deceased Mohd Yusuf. As per Mohd. Idris (PW 10) the relation between the deceased and the accused-respondent are not cordial, therefore, there is every possibility that Jarina (PW 1) and Raisa (PW 5) and Mohd. Idris (PW 10) are also not having good relations with the accused-respondent and keeping in view of this possibility it is not safe to rely on the testimony of the above witnesses.
(3.) LEARNED trial court has thoroughly examined the material available on record and has found that the charges for the offence punishable under Sections 302/120-B and 301/120-B I.P.C. are not proved against the accused-respondent beyond doubt and in the facts and circumstances of the case, we found that the learned trial court has not committed any illegality in the acquitting the accused-respondent for the offence under Section 302/120-B and 201/120-B I.P.C. The leave to appeal having no merit, the same is hereby dismissed.;