The prosecution must establish guilt beyond all reasonable doubt, and circumstantial evidence must be conclusive. Confessions made to a police officer are inadmissible, and credible evidence is required for invoking the provisions of Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act.

JUDGMENT

Alok Kumar Verma, J. - This Government appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 19.12.2019 passed by the learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar in Sessions Trial No.35 of 2015, "State vs. Satish alias Mintu Chaudhary and others", whereby the learned trial court acquitted the respondent no.1-accused from the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC, acquitted the respondent nos.2 and 3, accused persons from the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 404 of IPC and acquitted the respondent no.4-accused from the offence punishable under Section 212 of IPC.

2. Briefly stated the prosecution story as it emerges from re-appreciation of the evidence on record is that on 17.06.2014, the informant, Anoop Agarwal, (PW-1), lodged an FIR at Police Station Kashipur with the allegations that at about 10.30 pm on 17.06.2014, when his cousin Arpit Kumar Agarwal, deceased, was coming towards his house on his vehicle Swift Car, some unknown persons had shot him in front of the house of Anil Mittal. Thereafter, Arpit Kumar Agarwal was taken to the Jeevan Rekha Hospital, where he was declared dead.

3. On the basis of written information, (Ext.Ka-1), the FIR was registered under Section 302 of IPC. The inquest proceeding and post-mortem of the dead body of the deceased were conducted on 18.06.2014. After completion of the investigation, the respondents-accused persons were charge-sheeted along with the co-accused persons Satish alias Mintu Chaudhary and Rajesh Kamboj.

4. The charges were framed. The accused persons denied the charges and claimed to be tried.

5. During trial, the case abated against the co- accused Satish alias Mintu Chaudhary, and co-accused Rajesh Kamboj due to their death.

6. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused persons, the prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses.

7. Statements of the accused persons were recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, wherein they denied the entire evidence of the prosecution.

8. The learned trial court heard arguments, appreciated the evidence, and held that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused persons beyond all reasonable doubt.

9. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties.

10. Mr. J.S. Virk, the learned Deputy Advocate General for the State, submitted that the learned trial court has completely overlooked the glairing facts of the case according to which, the involvement of the accused persons has been proven. The evidences adduced on behalf of the prosecution are trustworthy, which are enough to establish the involvement of the respondents-accused persons in the commission of the crime; the respondents-accused persons confessed their guilt; the recoveries, at the instance the respondents, are also proved; the guilt of the respondents-accused persons are fully proved. Therefore, the judgment of acquittal is not justified in the eyes of law.

11. On the other hand, Mr. D.C.S. Rawat, Advocate with Mr. Tajhar Qayyum, Advocate for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 supported the impugned judgment.

12. The law is well settled that the order of acquittal strengthen the presumption of the innocence of the accused. It is equally the duty of the Court to see that the guilty do not escape punishment. Therefore, we have carefully assessed the evidences adduced by the prosecution.

13. Mr. Anoop Kumar Agarwal, (PW-1), the informant, has deposed that on 17.06.2014, when his cousin Arpit Kumar was coming towards his house in his Swift Car, some unknown persons had shot him in front of the house of Anil Mittal. After receiving this information, the deceased was taken to the hospital. This witness has proved his written report, (Ext.Ka.-1).

14. Mr. Ramesh Chandra Pandey, (PW-2) stated that on 18.06.2014, simple and blood stained earth were taken by the police from the spot. He further stated that on the same day, a white Swift Car was taken by t