State of U.P. appealed against acquittal under Section 14(k) of U.P. Panchayati Raj Act due to unproven charge dispute and evidence discrepancies. Single judge dismissed leave to appeal.
Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed with acquittal upheld.
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. - 24
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 892 of 2002
Appellant :- State Of U.P. Respondent :- Anil Kumar Singhal . Counsel for Appellant :- R.P. Dube
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
By way of this appeal, the State has felt aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal dated 18.8.2001 given in favour of the accused who has been acquitted of offence alleged under Section 14 (k) of U.P. Panchayati Raj Act.
The accused was tried as he had not given the charge to incumbent Gram Pradhan. However, while going through the judgment impugned, it appears that dispute of handing over of charge for which the accused was tried, has not been proved properly.
There are discrepancies in the evidence led before the Court below.
Hence, leave refused and the appeal is dismissed.
Order Date :- 5.10.2018 DKS
State Of U.P.
Anil Kumar Singhal
Kaushal Jayendra Thaker
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
