1

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Criminal Appeal  No(s). 1088 of 2018 (arising out of SLP(Crl.)No.7914 of 2015)

KRISHAN KUMAR                                      Appellant(s)

                               VERSUS

THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.                      Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

BANUMATHI, J. :

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal arises out of an order dated 24.08.2015 of the

High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail

Application No.3953 of 2015 in which the High Court has set aside

the order of acquittal of the appellant and remitted the matter

back to the trial court for de novo trial only on the ground that

the prosecutrix was not examined before the trial court.

3. We have heard Mr. Tripurari Rai, learned counsel appearing

for the appellant, Mr. Abhishek Gupta, learned counsel for the

applicant-prosecutrix and Mr. Anish Maheshwari, learned counsel

for the respondent-State.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the High

Court  while  considering  the  bail  application  in  S.B.  Criminal

Misc. Bail Application No.3953 of 2015 filed by one Satish, even

without issuing notice to the appellant herein who was acquitted

by the trial court on the ground of absence of evidence, chose to

set aside the order of acquittal.  It was further submitted that

2

order of acquittal was recorded by the trial court after a full-

fledged trial and while so setting aside the acquittal the High

Court  should  have  given  an  opportunity  of  hearing  to  the

appellant.

5. We find force in the submission of learned counsel for the

appellant.  At this juncture, Mr. Abhishek Gupta, learned counsel

appearing  for  the  applicant-prosecutrix,  has  submitted  that

against the order of acquittal of the appellant, the prosecutrix

has also filed an appeal i.e. S.B. Crl. Misc. Application NO.198

of 2016 in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.802 of 2016 which is stated to

be pending before the High Court.

6. In such view of the matter and since opportunity has not been

afforded to the appellant, the impugned order is set aside and the

matter is remitted to the High Court for fresh consideration.  The

appeal is accordingly disposed of.

7. We request the High Court to afford sufficient opportunity to

the appellant herein in S.B. Crl. Appeal No.802 of 2016 and to the

prosecutrix while considering the matter afresh and decide the

same expeditiously in accordance with law.  

..........................J.                 (R. BANUMATHI)

..........................J.         (VINEET SARAN)

NEW DELHI, AUGUST 28, 2018.