The High Court rejected the appellant State's prayer for leave to appeal against the trial court's acquittal of accused persons where all prosecution witnesses turned hostile and failed to identify the offenders.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 13
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 2729 of 2010
Appellant :- State Of U.P. Respondent :- Shiv Prasad Yadav & Others Counsel for Appellant :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
This appeal has been filed by the State/appellant with a prayer to grant leave to appeal against the judgment and order dated 24.8.2009 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 3, Gorakhpur whereby the respondent/accused Shiv Prasad Yadav, Santosh Yadav, Shriram Yadav and Gama Yadav were acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 323, 452, 504, 506, 336, 308 IPC, Police Station Sahjanwa, District Gorakhpur.
From perusal of the impugned judgment and order, it reveals that all the witnesses of fact have turned hostile and did not support the prosecution version. PW-1 Raj Kishore Yadav has admitted in his statement that all the accused persons have covered their faces, due to which, he could not identified the miscreants. Accordingly, learned trial court has passed the impugned order of acquittal in respect of respondents/accused.
I find no infirmity in the impugned judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned trial court.
In view of above, this application seeking leave to appeal is, accordingly rejected and, consequently the appeal is also dismissed .
Order Date :- 13.9.2018 Jaswant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the acquittal of the accused is liable to be set aside on appeal?
State Of U.P.
Shiv Prasad Yadav & Others
Umesh Chandra Tripathi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
