Court No. - 45
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 2082 of 1992 Appellant :- State Of U.P. Respondent :- Yasin & Others Counsel for Appellant :- A.G.A Counsel for Respondent :- Akhilesh Kumar Rajbhar,Kuldeep Saxena,Nazrul Islam Jafri Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Heard learned A.G.A. for the State appellant/ applicant and perused the material on record.
This application has been filed by the State appellant/applicant with the prayer that leave to appeal may be granted against the judgement and order dated 2.7.1992, passed in Sessions Trial No. 602 of 1988 (State vs. Yasin & others), under Sections 394/ 397 I.P.C., Police Station- Totari, District- Saharanpur by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Saharanpur, whereby the accused respondents have been acquitted for the offence punishable under the sections referred to above.
As per the prosecution case, the allegation against the accused respondents is that they entered into the house of the victim and committed loot in the midnight of 17/18.3.1988 at about 1:00 am and also inflicted injury upon the victim. The court below after scanning and analyzing the entire evidence available on record has observed that identification proceedings in respect of the alleged looted articles were not held and, therefore, it cannot be said that the articles were looted in the alleged incident. The court below has further observed that no evidence with regard to the identification of the accused was produced before the trial court and also there is no evidence that the accused respondents after being arrested were kept ''ba parda". It is also notable from the record that according to doctor none of the injuries were said to have been caused by firearm.
From perusal of the record, we do not find any factual or legal error in the assessment of evidence by the court below while acquitting the accused respondents. Moreover, the view taken by the court below is a possible view. The court below has given cogent, convincing and satisfactory reasons while passing the order of acquittal.
We, therefore, do not consider it to be a fit case for grant of leave to appeal to the applicants. The application seeking leave to appeal is, accordingly, rejected and, consequently the appeal is also dismissed.
Order Date :- 30.3.2018 Atmesh