Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

State Of U P vs Sitaram And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|28 November, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Chief Justice's Court
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 803 of 2018
Appellant :- State Of U.P. Respondent :- Sitaram And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- G.A.
Hon'ble Govind Mathur,Chief Justice Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
Order on Criminal Misc. (Leave to Appeal) Application This application is before us to have leave to question correctness of the judgment dated 30th July, 2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Gorakhpur in Sessions Trial No. 312 of 2008.
Under the judgment impugned, learned trial court acquitted the accused respondents from the charge relating to commission of offence described under Section 304 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The argument advanced by learned Additional Government Advocate is that though the main accused against whom an specific allegation for causing fatal injuries died during the course of the trial but merely on that account other accused persons could have not been acquitted who were otherwise sharing common intention. It is asserted that the charge of committing murder was framed with the aid of Section 34 and as such, the Court should have examined the evidence relating to sharing of common intention among the accused persons.
We do not find any merit in the argument advanced. On the basis of the facts, as unfolded in the judgment impugned, it is apparent that Sita Ram, Daya Ram, Bhajuram and Gyanti Devi though were together at the time when quarrel between the parties took place but the sole allegation of causing Latthi injuries are against Daya Ram. A vague statement is available on record that Bhrignath, Briju and Rajesh were also subjected to Latthi blows but nothing has been stated who caused such injuries. In entirety the evidence available on record indicates that the sole allegation of giving fatal injuries was against Daya Ram and there is no evidence available to establish sharing of any common intention. In such circumstance, we do not find any just reason to grant the leave as prayed for. The leave application is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.11.2018 VMA
(Dr. Y. K. Srivastava, J.) (Govind Mathur, C.J.)
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

State Of U P vs Sitaram And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
28 November, 2018
Judges
  • Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
Advocates
  • Ga