State of U.P. vs Tribhuwan and Others

Heard learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the trial court judgment and record.

Written arguments filed by the learned A.G.A. be kept on record.

This Government Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 6.11.2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 3, Azamgarh in S.T. No. 101 of 1999 (State Vs. Tribhuwan and another) under Sections 302 and 201 I.P.C. P.S. Jahanaganj, District Azamgarh.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that the incident had taken place in the night between 25 /26.5.1998 at about 10 p.m.The F.I.R. was lodged on 26.5.1998 at 2.30 p.m. in which it was alleged that the informant and his family members after taking meals had gone to sleep and the accused persons were sitting andchatting with his son Heera Lal, who was lying on a cot.Thereafter the accused persons tried to take away the son of the informant, on which the other son of the informant Tribhuwan and grand son Deena asked them not to take away Heera Lal but they said that they would be coming back in a short while. Thereafter, the son of the informant did not return to his house. When the son of the informant did not return to his house, then the informant started searching for his son. About 6.00 a.m., the dead body of the deceased Heera Lal was recovered from the boring of one Fekoo Singh. Then he found that there were several injuries on the person of the deceased.

The trial court acquitted the accused-respondent on the ground that there are two alleged eye witnesses namely Kedar, who was examined as P.W. 3 but has not supported the prosecution case and turned hostile and the second eye witness Bechan who has not been examined. Thereafter, the trial court further observed that no adequate motive has been assigned to the accused-persons to commit this crime.

The presence of P.W. 1 who has lodged the present first information report, is doubtful and further the first information report was lodged after the dead body of the deceased was recovered from the boring.The deceased was of bad character with a number of enemies. The report was unduly delayed.

The learned A.G.A argued that the trial court has wrongly acquitted the accused-respondents as there was of last seen evidence and the first information report was not unduly delayed and there was no reason for false implication of the accused-respondents.

We have gone through the entire record and we find that there is no reason to interfere with the judgment of the trial court as there is no perversity in the judgment, hence, the leave to appeal is rejected and the appeal is accordingly dismissed.