Dismissed¶12

Chandrabhan v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC7 Oct 2025C14A1/12/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Shekhar Kumar Yadav, J.), C14A1 No. 12 of 2025, decided 08.10.2025: complainant's appeal against acquittal under Section 14-A(2) SC/ST Act dismissed; acquittal of accused in Special Session Trial No. 41 of 2015 under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)(X) SC/ST Act (P.S. Nagar, District Basti) upheld; prosecution failed to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt; no interference warranted; Chandrabhan v. State of U.P. and 2 Others.

What did the court decide?

None; the appellant's prayer to set aside the acquittal was refused and the trial court's judgment of acquittal was upheld. ¶12

Chandrabhan Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPEAL AGAINST ACQUITTAL IN SC/ST ACT No. - 12 of 2025

¶2

Chandrabhan

¶3

	Versus .....Appellant(s)
State Of U.P. And 2 Others	.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s) Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Ravindra Prakash Srivastava : G.A.

¶4

Court No. - 86

¶5

HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.

¶6

Heard Mr. Ravindra Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. S.P. Shukla, learned counsel for the opposite parties no.2 and 3 and learned AGA as well as perused the entire record.

¶7

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the complainant to set aside impugned order dated 28.11.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T., Basti in Special Session Trial No.41 of 2015 (State Vs. Surya Prakash Mishra and another), under Sections 323, 504, 506 of IPC and Section 3(1)(X) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Nagar, District- Basti.

¶8

It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that specific role has been assigned against the opposite parties no.2 & 3 but the court below without considering the statements of prosecution witnesses, illegally acquitted the opposite parties no.2 & 3. It is further contended that findings recorded by the court below is perverse, illegal, unjust, improper and bad in the eye of law. The impugned order passed by the court below is liable to be set-aside.

¶9

C14A1 No. 12 of 2025

¶10

¶11

4 I have perused the impugned judgement recorded by the trial court.

¶12

The court's reasoning for acquittal is sound and based on a thorough appreciation of the evidence. The trial court correctly concluded that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, no interference with the trial court's well-reasoned decision is warranted. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. The judgment of the trial court is upheld.

¶13

Consequently, the appeal is accordingly dismissed .

¶14

October 8, 2025

¶15

Krishna*

¶16

(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)

¶17

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Chandrabhan v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandrabhan v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases