Dismissed

State of U.P. v. Sanjeew

Allahabad HC22 Nov 2018GOVA/1131/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an appeal against an acquittal, the High Court examined the trial court's findings. Finding no illegality or perversity and noting reasonable doubt based on conflicting testimonies and lack of supporting medical evidence, the Court rejected the application for leave to appeal and dismissed the appeal against the acquittal.

What did the court decide?

Application for leave to appeal rejected; original standing appeal dismissed; acquittal stands confirmed.

State of U.P. Vs Sanjeew — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

Court No. - 51

¶3

Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 1131 of 2005

¶4

Appellant :- State Of U.P. Respondent :- Sanjeew Counsel for Appellant :- Govt. Advocate

¶5

Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri J.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State on the application seeking leave to appeal against the judgment and order dated 27.10.2004 by means of which the accused-respondent was acquitted of offence under Section 376/511, 324 and 427 IPC.

¶7

We have heard learned AGA at great length and have perused the findings as recorded by the trial court. The lower court record is also available. On perusal, we find that the court has recorded categorical finding based on evidence on record has given giving cogent reasons on which the verdict of acquittal has been returned. The trial court has categorically recorded that there are vast differences in the testimonies of victim as well as the first informant, that the medical evidence does not support the ocular evidence, that the injuries shown does not support the manner in which the prosecution story has been built up and that the injuries are simple in nature and thus, the trial court has held that entire story is rife with doubts. The conclusion has been given in paragraph no. 15 of the judgment of the trial court, which is extracted herein as under :

¶8

" इस प्रकार अभिभियोजन पक्ष द्वारा पेश की गयी साक्ष्य पी०डब्लु० 1 लगायत-6 की साक्ष्य से अभिभियुक्त संजीव द्वारा पिरवादी कमरवीर की पत्नी कृन्तेश के साथ जबरन बलात्कार करने का प्रयास िकया जाना और पिरवादी की पत्नी कृन्तेश को धारदार हथिथयार दरांती से मारकर स्वेच्छा से चोट पहथुचाय जाना तथा श्रीमती कृतेन्श का कुतार फाड़कर व सलवार का नाडा तोड़कर 50/= रूपये से अभिधक का नुकसान िकया जाना सन्देहथ से परे सािबत नहथीं हथोता हथै। अभिभियोजन पक्ष पर यहथ भिार था िक वहथ अभपना मामला सन्देहथ से परे सािबत करता, परन्तु अभिभियोजन पक्ष ने अभपने मामले को सन्देहथ से परे सािबत करने मे पूर्णरतया अभसफल रहथा हथै। बचाव पक्ष उल्लिल्ल ि खखित व्यवस्था मोहथनलाल प्रित स्टेट आफ राजस्थान, क्राईम्स-2003, सुप्रीम कोटर, पेज-501 का लाभि पाने का अभिधकारी हथै। इस प्रकार पत्रावली पर उल्लपलब्ध साक्ष्य से अभिभियोजन पक्ष द्वारा अभिभियुक्त के िवरूद्ध लगाये गये आरोप सािबत नहथीं हथोते हथै। "

¶9

¶10

No illegality or perversity has been attributed to the finding of the trial court while returning the verdict of acquittal. By no stretch of imagination can it be said that the view taken by the trial court is not possible or plausible one.

¶11

Accordingly, the application seeking leave to appeal is rejected . Consequently, the appeal also stands dismissed .

¶12

Copy of the order be certified to the court concerned for consequential follow up action.

¶13

Order Date :- 22.11.2018 I. Batabyal

State of U.P. v. Sanjeew

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of U.P. v. Sanjeew

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of U.P. Vs Chandrapal Singh and Another

Asha and Another Vs state of u.p. and 2 others

State of U.P. Vs Mahendra and Another

State of U.P. Vs Pradeep Chandra

State of U.P. Vs Bihari Lal Nishad and Another

Shama @ Shama Parveen Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others