State of U.P. v. Amar Nath and Another
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Allahabad (Lucknow Bench) heard an application for leave to appeal against the acquittal of accused persons. The court held that the trial court correctly found the prosecution failed to prove the case against the appellant and found no perversity or illegal inferences prompting interference.
What did the court decide?
Leave to appeal is refused and the application is rejected; the appeal is dismissed.
What the court decided
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:52416
Court No. - 16
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 378 No. - 146 of 2016
Applicant :- State of U.P. Opposite Party :- Amar Nath And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Govt. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- Gyanendra Singh Sikarwar,Kuldeep Singh Sikarwar
Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.
The case is taken up in the revised call.
Heard learned A.G.A. for the State, learned Counsel for the opposite parties and perused the material available on record.
The present leave to appeal under Section 378 Cr.P.C. has been filed against the judgment and order dated 16.03.2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.4,/Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes Act, Hardoi acquitting the opposite parties in Sessions Trial No.701/2009, Case Crime No.893/2008 under Section 323 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(10) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Sandila, District Hardoi.
As per the prosecution version, the complainant and the accused persons were resident of same. On 27.07.2007 at about 4:30 P.M., when the complainant alongwith her associate was constructing a divider in her field, the accused persons reached there and stopped her from doing so, on which the complainant replied that she is constructing a divider in her own field. Thereafter, the accused persons got annoyed with her and started beating her with kicks and fists and abused her with caste related language. On hue and cry made, the nearby villagers arrived at the spot, then the accused persons fled away from the spot.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the acquittal of the accused persons under sections 323 and 506 IPC and the SC/ST Act.
Whether the trial court erred in concluding that the prosecution failed to establish the involvement of the respondent No.1.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
State of U.P.
Coram
Shamim Ahmed
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · July
- Registered
- Case no.
- A378/146/2016
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court