JUDGMENT :

1. Instant Criminal Acquittal Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 28.08.2015 rendered by Ld. Sessions Judge Bhaderwah in case File No. 09/Sessions titled State of J&K Versus Swarn Singh @ Titti and another, whereby, respondents (accused) have been acquitted of the charges leveled against them in FIR No 05/2002 of police station Gandoh for commission of offences U/Ss 302/34 RPC.

2. Aggrieved of and feeling dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 28-08-2015, appellant State of J&K has questioned it’s legality, propriety and correctness, and has sought it’s setting aside/quashment on the following grounds;

(i) that the judgment impugned is contrary to law and facts which has been passed by the Trial Court in a mechanical manner without appreciating the circumstantial and other evidences available on record;

(ii) that the Trial Court has failed to appreciate the prosecution evidence and the conclusion drawn by the trial court is against the weight of evidence, whereas, the occurrence has been proved by the prosecution;

(iii) that the Trial Court has rendered acquittal in favour of respondents/accused which is bad in the eyes of law, the important piece of evidence has been ignored by the Trial Court, the circumstances have been corroborated by medical report which are sufficient to prove the involvement of accused persons in the crime, in as much as, the impugned judgment is based on surmises and conjectures and deserves to be set aside.

3. Alongwith the main acquittal appeal, appellant preferred an application for condonation of two (2) days delay in filing appeal, wherein, the appellant specifically contended that a strong prima facie case exists in favour of appellant which is sure to succeed on merits, the sanction for filling of appeal was granted by the Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs vide Government Order No. 4014-LD (ACQ) of 2015 dated 13.10.2015, the delay of two days in filing appeal is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to the facts narrated above. In terms of order of this Court dated 22.10.2015, two (2) days delay in filing the acquittal appeal was condoned and the appeal was admitted for hearing.

4. Sh. Suneel Malhotra Ld. GA appearing on behalf of State, has vehemently submitted, that in the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence available on record, the court of Pr. Sessions Judge Bhaderwah has committed a grave error in acquitting the accused persons for commission of serious offence u/s 302 r/w Sec. 34 of IPC. It is argued, that the trial court ought to have relied upon and considered the evidence of eyewitnesses and circumstantial witnesses who have led cogent, credible and trustworthy evidence against the accused persons, the reasons given by the trial court on appreciation of evidence do not inspire any confidence, the trial court has erred in not relying upon the medical evidence, and if in the right perspective the trial court would have appreciated the evidence it could have recorded finding of conviction against the accused persons.

5. Ld. Counsel for respondents/accused persons, while supporting the impugned judgment of the trial court, have strenuously argued, that the trial court has rightly appreciated the evidence on record and has rightly came to the conclusion that offence of murder u/s 302 RPC has not been proved against the accused persons as all the eyewitnesses have turned hostile, in much as, the circumstantial witnesses have also not led cogent, trustworthy and reliable evidence. It is vehemently argued, that the judgment impugned acquitting the accused persons does not suffer from any perversity, impropriety or illegality and the same does not call any interference by the appellate court, prayer has been made for dismissal of the appeal.

6. We have heard Sh. Suneel Malhotra, Ld. GA for the State and Ld. Counsel for accused. The facts germane to the filing of instant acquittal appeal are narrated as under: