A.F.R

Court No.92

Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No.- 2574 of 1985

Appellant :-State of U.P.

Respondent :-

Ganga Vishan and others

Counsel for Appellant:- A.G.A.

Counsel for Respondent:-

Pavan Kumar Kushwaha

Hon’ble Gajendra Kumar, J.

1.

The State of U.P. has preferred this appeal under Section

378 Cr.P.C. assailing the correctness of the judgment and order

dated 07.06.1985 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Sr.

Division-VIIth, District-Bareilly in Criminal Case No.193 of 1985

(State Vs. Ganga Vishun and others) whereby, the learned court

below has acquitted all the four accused-persons (respondents)

of the charges under Sections 323/324/34 of Indian Penal Code.

2.

The Appeal against respondent no.1 (Ganga Vishun) and

respondent no.2 (Nathoo Lal) stands abated as they reported to

have died, which is evident from the death certificate, filed by

opposite party no.3, a copy of the same has been annexed as

Annexure-SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit. Appeal against

respondent no.3 (Hori Lal) has already been abated by a co-

ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 01.02.2016,

therefore, the same will proceed against respondent no.4-Siya

Ram only.

3.

The prosecution story in brief is that, on the basis of

written report dated 25.04.1981 (Ex.Ka-1), a chick FIR was

registered at 22:10 p.m. against the respondents under Sections

324/323//504/506 IPC (Ex.Ka-6). In the said report, it is alleged

by the informant-Roshal Lal s/o Jhunnu Lal (P.W.-1) that on the

fateful day of 25.04.1981 at about 06:00 p.m., accused-persons

were winnowing the wheat in the field of the informant, and

when informant-Roshan Lal (P.W.-1) along with his brother

Ram Kumar (P.W.-2) objected to do the same to the

respondents, they denied and said in a very rudely manner

that they will take it from this field itself, and after a few

minutes, informant/complainant saw that accused-persons,

namely, Ganga Vishu, Nathoo Lal and Siya Ram armed with

‘Ganta’ and Hori Lal armed with ‘lathi-danda’ committed

maar-peet with the informant and his brother, as a result, they

received serious injuries.

4.

While framing charge, the trial judge framed charges

against the accused-persons under Sections 323/324/34 IPC.

5.

So as to hold accused persons guilty, prosecution has

examined as many as four witnesses. Statements of accused

persons were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in which

they pleaded their innocence and false implication.

6.

By the impugned judgment, the trial judge has acquitted

the respondents of all the charges. Hence, the present appeal

by the State, assailing the acquittal of the accused-persons.

7.

Learned AGA for the State-appellant submits that the trial

judge has erred in law in acquitting all the accused-persons

(respondents). He submits that once, the informants (injured)

have made allegations against the respondents, the court was

obliged to convict the accused.

8.

On the other hand, Sri Pavan Kumar Kushwaha, learned

counsel for the surviving respondent no.4, submits that he was

never involved in committing the aforesaid offence and false

allegation has been levelled against him. As such, there is no

illegality or perversity in the order, passed by the learned court

below, hence no interference is called for by this Court.

9.

I have heard learned AGA for the State-appellant, Sri

Pavan Kumar Kushwaha, learned counsel appearing for the

surviving accused-respondent no.4 and perused the material

available on record.

2 of 10

10.

As per the statement of Roshan Lal (P.W.-1), who has

specifically stated in his written report dated 25.04..1981

(Ex.Ka-1) that Hori Lal was armed with lathi-danda and other

accused-persons were armed with Ganta, but in his cross-

examination, Roshan Lal (P.W.-1) has stated that Hori Lal was

armed with Ganta and other accused-persons were armed with

lathi-danda and committed maar-peet with the informants-

injured, which creates doubt