Court No. - 50
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 2528 of 1997 Appellant :- State Of U.P.
Respondent :- Kunwar Pal & Others Counsel for Appellant :- Vijay Shanker Mishra,A.G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The application has been moved by State for leave to file appeal against the impugned judgment and order dated 7.4.1997 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-Xth, Meerut in Case No.220 of 1994 (State Vs. Kunwar Pal and others), acquitting the accused-respondents from the charges under sections 147, 452, 323, 427 IPC Upon hearing learned AGA and perusal of record, I find that in this case relating to criminal incident dated 2.7.1994, the trial court has discussed and analyzed the prosecution evidence in detail. As per prosecution version as many as 7 persons entered the house of first informant and committed marpeet with lathis and also dismantled the thatched construction of hut and the report of the incident was lodged after two days on 4.7.1994. In the incident in question Smt. Nareshwati, Kusum, and Sudha are alleged to have sustained injuries, but there is no medical examination report of Kusum and Sudha on record and as per medical examination of Smt. Nareshwati duly proved by P.W.4 Dr. V.P. Gupta she was examined after 5 days of the incident on 7.7.1994 and six contusions and two abrasions were found on non vital part of her body, which were found to be simple in nature. Medical officer has also stated that the injuries were superficial in nature and may be sustained by falling on the ground or may also be self inflicted. Apart from above, it is proved from the evidence on record that civil litigation is pending between the parties and the statement of independent witness Jeet Singh is in contradiction with the statement of Smt. Nareshwati, the injured witness.
It is highly unbelievable that 7 persons committed marpeet with lathis and the injured Smt. Nareshwati did not sustain any grievous injury or even any simple injury on her vital part. Learned trial court has not committed any mistake in acquitting the accused respondent for the offences under sections 147, 452, 323, 427 IPC.
It is settled principle of law as held by Hon'ble the Supreme court in the case of K. Prakashan Vs.
P.K. Surenderan, (2008) 1 SCC 258 "When two views are possible, appellate Court should not reverse the Judgment of acquittal merely because the other view was possible. When Judgment of trial Court was neither perverse, nor suffered from any legal infirmity or non consideration/misappropriation of evidence on record, reversal thereof by High Court was not justified".
In view of discussions made above, I have come to the conclusion that the learned AGA has failed to show any legal infirmity, incorrectness or perversity in the impugned order of acquittal and there is no sufficient ground for interfering with or setting it aside the impugned order of acquittal and substituting it with conviction order. The application for leave to file appeal has no force and is liable to be dismissed.
The application for leave to file appeal is dismissed accordingly and the appeal also stands dismissed.
Order Date :- 31.5.2018 Tamang
Order on Memo of Appeal Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Dismissed.
For order, see order of date passed on application for leave to file appeal.
Order Date :- 31.5.2018 Tamang