State vs Mohd. Rafiq - 2022 Supreme(J&K) 296

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(J&K) 296

SANJEEV KUMAR, PUNEET GUPTA
State – Appellant
Versus
Mohd. Rafiq – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Suneel Malhotra, Divyanshu Malhotra.
For the Respondent: Anil Gupta.

JUDGMENT :

PUNEET GUPTA, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved of the judgment dated 30.03.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Doda, acquitting all the accused/respondents herein of the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 RPC and 20/27 Arms Act, the State has preferred the instant criminal acquittal appeal.

2. Learned State counsel has assailed the impugned judgment reiterating the grounds averred in the memo of appeal. It is stated that the judgment impugned is against the facts and law, and the learned Additional Sessions Judge has not appreciated the evidence in its right perspective. Both direct and circumstantial evidence produced by the prosecution clearly establish the involvement of accused in the commission of crime. With these submissions, learned counsel prays for allowing the appeal and setting aside of the impugned judgment.

3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents/accused has supported the impugned judgment of the trial Court stating that the said judgment is based on proper appreciation of evidence on record and the instant acquittal appeal filed by the State deserves rejection out rightly.

4. Heard learned counsel for both the sides and gone thr