Dismissed

State of U.P. v. Smt. Guddi and 2 Others

Allahabad HC9 Jul 2018GOVA/2476/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a government appeal against a judgment where accused were acquitted of offences under Sections 363 and 366 IPC. The High Court was satisfied with the lower court's reasons and applied settled legal principles. The application for leave to appeal was rejected and the appeal dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The application seeking leave to appeal is rejected; consequently, the appeal is dismissed.

State of U.P. Vs Smt. Guddi and 2 Others — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 2476 of 2013

¶3

Appellant :- State Of U.P. Respondent :- Smt. Guddi & 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Govt. Advocate

¶4

Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J. Hon'ble Ifaqat Ali Khan,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Rahul Srivastava, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State, learned counsel for the accused-respondents and perused the record.

¶6

The present government appeal has been filed along with an application for seeking leave to appeal against the judgment and order dated 20.2.2013 passed by IInd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Gautam Budh Nagar in ST No. 862 of 2009 (State of UP Vs Guddi and otehrs) whereby accused-respondents, namely Smt. Guddi, Shanti Chahan and Pradeep have been acquitted for the offence under Sections 363 and 366 IPC and accused repondent no. 3 has been acquitted from the charges under section 376 IPC.

¶7

Heard learned AGA at length and we have also perused the findings and record of the court concerned. The counsel for the respondents states that the court concerned has given elaborate and cogent reasons for acquitting the accused-respondents. Some of the relevant observations of the court are extracted hereinbelow:

¶8

^;g LFkkfir fof/k gS fd fpfdRlk vk;q ,d vuqekfur vk;q gksrh gS u fd fuf'pr vk;q ftles nksuks rjQ nks o"kZ dk vUrj lEHko gks ldrk gSA ihfM+rk vo;Ld gks& ;g lkfcr djus dk nkf;Ro vfHk;kstu ij Fkk fdUrq i=koyh ij vfHk;kstu dh vksj ls ,slk dksbZ lk{; Hkh izLrqr ugh fd;k x;k gS] ftlls ihfM+rk dh vk;q 18 o"kZ ls vYi nf'kZr gksrh gksA vU;Fkk Hkh fof/k dk ;g lqLFkkfir fl)kar gS fd ;fn fdlh rF; dks nks fuZopu lEHko gks rks vfHk;qDr ds izfr mnkjoknh fuZopu gh xzg.k fd;k tkuk pkfg,A mDr leLr ifjfLFkfr;kW ,dek= ;gh fu"d"kZ fudkyus ds fy, izsfjr djrh gS fd ihfM+rk dh vk;q ?kVuk ds le; 18 o"kZ ls de ugh FkhA Li"Vr% ihfM+rk ?kVuk ds le; o;Ldrk dks iw.kZ dj pqdh Fkh& blesa lansg ugh gSA

¶9

izfr ijh{kk esa bl lk{kh us xqMMh ls ?kVuk ds 3&4 fnu ckn ekywekr djus rFkk ik.Ms; ls ,d lIrkg ckn iwNrkN djus dh ckr crk;h gSA ;g le> ls ijs gS fd tc mls xqMMh o eerk ds lkFk tkus dh ckr irk py xbZ Fkh vkSj xqMMh ls ik.Ms; ds ;gkW ihfM+rk dks NksM+us dh ckr ekywe gks xbZ Fkh rks fQj mlus mlh fnu xqMMh] eerk o dkS'kysUnz ls iwNrkN D;ksa ugh dhA xqe'kqnxh dh fjiksVZ fnukad 12-09-2009 dks ?kVuk ds yxHkx ,d ekg ckn Fkkus ij fy[kokuk mlus crk;k gSA ;g vk'p;Z dh ckr gS fd fdlh dh iq=h vpkud ?kj ls pyh tk;s vkSj mls ;g Hkh irk py tk;s fd mls dkSu ysdj x;k Fkk rks Hkh og muls rqjUr iwNrkN u djds vkjke ls cSBk jgs vkSj 3&4 fnu ;k ,d lIrkg ckn iwNrkN djs vkSj rRdky iqfyl dh lgk;rk u ysdj fjiksVZ Hkh yxHkx ,d ekg ckn vafdr djk;s& ;g firk ds vkpj.k ds foijhr vkpj.k gksus ds

¶10

dkj.k lansg iSnk djrk gSA

¶11

vfHk;qDr iznhi o vfHk;qDr 'kkUrh us /kkjk 313 n.M izfØ;k lafgrk ds vius vfHkdFkuksa es Hkh ihfM+rk ds bl dFku dk leFkZu fd;k gS fd xqM~Mh }kjk ukSdjh yxkus ;k 'kknh djkus ds fy;s 'kkUrh ds ikl yk;s tkus ij ihfM+rk us ethZ ls iznhi ls fookg fd;kA iznhi us Hkh dgk fd ihfM+rk dh ethZ ls mlds lkFk fookg fd;k rFkk ihfM+rk ds mijksDr lk{; ls Hkh leLr ?kVuk Øe esa mldh lgefr iw.kZ :i ls ijhyf{kr gks jgh gSA mls mldh bPNk ds fo:) NydiV }kjk ys tk;k x;k gks& ,slk mlds }kjk dFku ugha fd;k x;k gS rFkk mldk o;Ld gksuk o lgefr nsus ds fy;s l{ke gksuk&izFke fcUnq ls Li"V gh gS bl izdkj tgkW rd bl lk{kh dk lEcU/k gS rks bl lk{kh dh lk{; ls vfHk;kstu dFkkud dks dksbZ cy izkIr ugha gksrkA^^

¶12

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and the finding recorded by the court concerned in which no illegality or perversity has been pointed out by the learned AGA and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court rendered in the cases of Muralidhar @ Gidda & Anr Vs State of Karnataka decided on 9 April, 2014 in Criminal Appeal No. 551 OF 2011, Basappa v. State of Karnataka, (2014) 5 SCC 154, Ramesh Harijan Vs. State of U.P. 2012 AIR SCW 2990 and Murugesan Vs. State through Inspector of Police 2012 AIR SCW 5627, no case for interference has been made out. The application seeking leave is hereby rejected. Consequently the appeal is also dismissed.

¶13

Copy of the order be certified to the court concerned for necessary compliance forthwith.

¶14

Record of the lower court has been received. Let it be sent back to the court concerned.

¶15

Order Date :- 9.7.2018 SKS

State of U.P. v. Smt. Guddi and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of U.P. v. Smt. Guddi and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of U.P. Vs Munish and 2 Ors.

State of U.P. Vs Ajeet Singh

State of U.P. Vs Raju and Others

Mahipal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tara Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

State of U.P. Vs Hifjur Rehman Urf Guddu