State v. Sajid & Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
This is a leave petition by the State to assail the acquittal of three accused persons in a Section 307 IPC case. The High Court held that the impugned judgment does not call for interference.
What the court decided
$~8
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- CRL.L.P. 687/2017
STATE ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State
versus
SAJID & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Mohit Bhandari, Advocate
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI
%
O R D E R 03.04.2018
We have heard the learned counsel and proceed to dispose of the present writ petition. The State has preferred this leave petition to seek leave to assail the judgment dated 01.08.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge – FTC, E Court, Shahadra, Karkardooma Court, Delhi in sessions Case No.03/2014, arising out of FIR No. 195/12, under Sections 307/323/341/34 IPC and 27 Arms Act, registered at Police Station – M.S. Park, Delhi.
By the impugned judgment, the respondents/accused have been acquitted by the trial court by holding that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The gist of the case of the prosecution was that the injured/ complainant/ PW-1 – Gabbar is a vegetable seller who puts his rehri in Shahdara, Sabji Mandi. On 11.10.2012 at about 10-10.30 AM, while sitting near his rehri , he saw the accused Sajid who is
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned judgment of acquittal of the accused persons calling for interference by this Court.
Whether the contradictions in the prosecution witness statement and lack of independent evidence warrant setting aside the acquittal.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
STATE
Coram
VIPIN SANGHI
P.S.TEJI
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court