Court No. - 32
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 3561 of 2012 Appellant :- State Of U.P. Respondent :- Ajai Singh Counsel for Appellant :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Shashi Kant,J.
This appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 29.5.2012 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court no.5, Hathras acquitting the accused-respondent under section 302 I.P.C. in S.T. No. 174 of 2001, State Vs. Ajai Singh, arising out of case crime no. 895 of 1999, and in Sessions Trial No. 165 of 2001, State Vs. Ajai Singh , arising out of caxse crime no. 918 of 1999 under sections 25/27 Arms Act, P./S.
/Sikandrarau District Hathras.
We have heard learned counsel for the State appellant and perused the trial court's judgment and record.
The trial court after scanning the entire evidence recorded a finding that there is no credible and convincing evidence available on record to prove the case beyond shadow of doubt and testimony of the witnesses were not trustworthy. The trial court has observed that according to the prosecution story when the shots were fired on the deceased from east side towards west side, the face of the deceased was towards west side and his back was facing east side but according to the medical report, instead of sustaining entry wound on his back, he received only one exit wound of gun shot on his back and except that exit wound no other injury was found on the back of the deceased and entry wound was found on his chest. Thus, there are material contradictions in the medical report as well as the testimony of the witnesses. The trial court has further observed that as per the prosecution version, two empty cartridges and two live cartridges were recovered from the place of the incident but when the recovered articles were opened in the court, seven cartridges were found and out of them, there were four empty cartridges and three live cartridges and as per the forensic science laboratory report the bullets/cartridges allegedly recovered from the possession of the accused were not found to have been fired from that very country made pistol of the accused which was allegedly used in the commission of the alleged crime. The court below has also discussed at length the entire evidence adduced by the prosecution . The trial court after scanning the entire evidence recorded a finding that the prosecution failed to prove the charges framed against the accused respondents beyond reasonable doubt. The veracity of the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses was found gravely suspected and the participation of all the accused persons were also found highly doubtful. Having opined thus, the benefit of doubt was accorded to the defence side and the prosecution story was disbelieved. Learned A.G.A also miserably failed to point out any illegality or infirmity in the findings so recorded by the court below. The trial court has also observed that the motive assigned to the accused is too weak and in fact there was no direct or indirect enmity of the accused with the deceased. Except giving reference to a quarrel prior to the incident between one Sandeep and deceased, there was no cogent and convincing reason to believe that deceased would dare to commit murder of the deceased on such trivial issue. According to the prosecution version, a number of persons were on the spot at the time of commission of the alleged incident, but except one witness, no other independent witness of the locality was produced in support of the prosecution story. The court below has also observed that the investigation made by the I.O. was highly defective and does not inspire confidence.
The trial court after scrutinizing and analyzing he entire evidence recorded a finding that the charges framed against the accused respondent do not stand proved beyond reasonable doubt.The veracity of the testimony of the prosecution witnesses was found gravely suspected and the participation of the accused person was also found highly doubtful. Having opined thus, the benefit of doubt was accorded to the accused side and the prosecution story was disbelieved. Learned A.G.A also failed to point out any illegality or infirmity in the findings so recorded by the court below.Thus, the court below appears to have rightly acquitted the accused respondent of the charges levelled against him.
Thus, it cannot be said that the view taken by the trial judge is perverse or unreasonable. Simply because another view might have been taken of the evidence provides no ground for interfering with the order of acquittal unless the view taken by the trial judge is not a possible view. The court below has given cogent, convincing and satisfactory reasons while passing the impugned judgment and order. We, therefore, do not consider it to be a fit case for grant of leave to appeal to the applicant. The application seeking leave to appeal is, accordingly, rejected and, consequently the appeal is also dismissed.
Order Date :- 30.10.2018 MLK