Court No. - 51
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 6740 of 2004 Appellant :- State Of U.P.
Respondent :- Rampal & Others Counsel for Appellant :- Vijay Shankar Misra
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ifaqat Ali Khan,J.
Heard Sri Rajesh Mishra learned AGA appearing for the State on the application seeking leave to appeal against the judgment and order dated 29.7.2004 by means of which accused respondents have been acquitted of the offences under Sections 147, 307 IPC.
It has been very fairly admitted by learned AGA that incident is of the year 1988 (29.8.1988) and the judgment of acquittal is dated 29.7.2004. The Government appeal against the order of acquittal was filed before this Court in the year 2004. The record shows that after filing the appeal in the year 2004 the same is being listed for the first time before any Bench of this Court. The order sheet is absolutely blank. It is apparent that more than 30 years has elapsed. However, at the insistence of learned AGA we have also gone through the findings as recorded by the court concerned. The court concerned after discussing the entire evidence on record has given cogent reasons for recording the findings of returning the verdict of acquittal. The court concerned has clearly observed that there existed previous enmity between the parties and the same finding is being extracted herein as under (in vernacular):-
"Isse yah spasth hota hai ki PW-3 Ram Bahadur wa uske pita ki Roop Singh wa uske pita se ranjish chal rahi thi aur aisa prateet hota hai ki PW-3 ne ranjish ke karan abhiyuktgan ke viruddh bayan diya hai."
After going through the entire evidence on record and after recording categorical finding the court concerned has concluded herein as under:-
"उपररोक्त सम्पपूरर वविश्ललेषर कले बबाद यह वनिष्कषर वनिकलतबा हहै वक अवभियरोजनि कले दबारबा जजनि ततीनि तथ्य कले सबावक्षिययों करो परतीवक्षित करबायबा गयबा हहै, उनिमम पती0 डब्लपू0 1 विबादती ओम प्रकबाश कले बयबानि वि आई चरोटम कबा कथनि ससदलेहबास्पद वि अवविश्विसतीय पबायबा गयबा हहै। समथरनि मम पलेश वकयले गयले गविबाहबानि पती0 डब्लपू 3 रबाम बहबादर वि पती0 डब्लपू 4 रज्जनि जससह करो बयबानियों मम कबाफफी गम्भितीर वविररोधबाभिबासती पबातले हहए उनिकले बयबानियों करो अवविश्विसनितीय वि ससदलेहबास्पद पबायबा गयबा हहै। तदनिदसबार अवभियरोजनि पक्षि अवभियक्तगर कले वविरुद्ध लगयले गयले तथबाकजथत आररोपयों करो पलेश कफी गयती सबाक्ष्य सले ससदलेह सले परले सबावबत करनिले मम असफल रहबा हहै। अततः सन्दलेह कबा लबाभि पबातले हहए अवभियक्तगर दरोष मदक्त हरोनिले यरोग्य हह।"
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that the view taken by the Court below is not possible and plausible thus the judgment of the court below cannot be interfered with by this Court only on account of the fact that another view is possible.
Learned A.G.A. has not been able to point out any illegality or perversity with the findings as recorded by the court below and thus it cannot be said that the view taken by trial court is a perverse view.
Thus in view of aforesaid consistent legal position as elaborated above and also in view of the fact that learned A.G.A. has failed to point out any illegality or perversity with the findings so recorded in the impugned order, no case for interference has been made out. No interference with the impugned judgment and order of acquittal is warranted. Accordingly the application seeking leave to appeal is rejected. Consequently, appeal is also dismissed.
Let a copy of this order be certified to the court concerned for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 25.7.2018 SP