An appellate court has the authority to reverse a trial court's acquittal if the judgment is perverse, ensuring substantial evidence confirms guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, particularly in cases involving political motive and eyewitness accounts.

JUDGMENT :

Rajiv Gupta, J.

1. Heard Sri Purshottam Upadhyaya, learned A.G.A for the State, Sri S.K. Tripathi assisted by Sri Abhinav Trivedi, learned counsel for the sole surviving accused respondent no. 2 - Santosh Kumar and perused the record.

2. The instant Government Appeal under Section 378 Cr.P.C. seeks to challenge the judgment and order dated 19.12.1983 passed by Vith Addl. Sessions Judge, Mainpuri in Sessions Trial No. 46 of 1983 ( State Vs. Parag Singh and others ) arising out of Case Crime No. 329 of 1982, Police Station- Bewar, District- Mainpuri, whereby the accused-respondent Nos. 1 to 4 have been acquitted of the charges under Sections 302 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC.

3. During the pendency of this Government Appeal before this Court, accused-respondent No. 1 Parag Singh had passed away and, therefore, the instant appeal qua the Respondent No. 1- Parag Singh has been abated by this Court vide order dated 3.2.2012. Consequently, accused-respondent Nos. 3 and 4 Brij Kishore and Rakesh Kumar had also passed away and therefore, the instant appeal qua Brij Kishore and Rakesh Kumar has already been abated by this Court vide order dated 12.5.2023.

4. Now, the appeal survives only on behalf of accused- respondent No. 2- Santosh Kumar.

5. Prosecution story in brief is that in July, 1982, there has been a Pradhani Election in the village. The said election was contested by first informant Surajpal Singh, Parag Singh and Vijaypal Singh, in which, Suraj Pal Singh was declared elected. Parag Singh had been the elected Pradhan of the village for the last about 26 years. After being defeated in the said election, Parag Singh started bearing animosity against the first informant Surajpal Singh and after election, he had threatened him that he would not let him remain alive. On the day of incident at about 8:15 p.m., his son Ravindra Kumar boarding a tractor was returning back to his village and at the relevant time when he reached in the lane in front of the baithaka of Parag Singh, the accused Parag Singh and his son Santosh Kumar and nephew Brij Kishore and Rakesh Singh were present there, who stopped his tractor and enquired from Ravindra Kumar as to why he was taking away the tractor from the lane lying in front of their house, whereupon Ravindra Kumar told the accused that the lane was a throughfare (public way) and, as such, nobody can restrain him from passing through the said lane. This incident resulted in verbal-spat between them. Consequently, Parag Singh asked Santosh Kumar, Brij Kishore and Rakesh Singh to bring the gun from their house and to put an end to the life of his son, however, somehow he escaped from the place of incident and revealed the entire incident to him. The first informant Surajpal Singh then advised his son Ravindra Kumar to keep away from accused- persons as they are dangerous persons and in future not to ply the tractor in front of their house.

6. It is further alleged that on the relevant date and time at about 8.30 p.m., while he was sitting in front of his door and his son Ravindra Kumar after parking his tractor started repairing the ball bearings of the front wheel of the tractor, where electric bulb was lighting at his doorstep and sufficient source of light was also available from the nearby houses. Meanwhile Parag Singh armed with gun and Santosh Kumar, Brij Kishore and Rakesh Singh armed with country made pistol reached at the place of incident, where Parag Singh exhorted to kill Ravindra Kumar to teach him a lesson for taking out the tractor from the lane lying in front of h