Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P. vs Manish on 26 July, 2022
Bench: Vivek Kumar Birla, Vikas Budhwar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 42
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 70 of 2019
Appellant :- State of U.P.
Respondent :- Manish
Counsel for Appellant :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
Heard Ms. Nandprabha Shukla, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State, who assisted the Court with the help of court's record and perused the record.
This appeal has been filed against the order dated 29.9.2018 passed in Session Trial No. 608 of 2015 (State ov U.P. vs. Manish Garg) arising out of Case Crime No. 219 of 2015, under Sections 302, 404 IPC, Police Station Kheragarh, District Agra.
From perusal of record we find that one criminal appeal being Criminal Misc. Application u/s 372 Cr.P.C. (Leave to Appeal) No. 428 of 2018 had already been dismissed vide order dated 20.11.2018, which is quoted as under:-
"Heard learned counsel for the appellant.
The application is preferred to grant leave to appeal against the judgment dated 29.09.2018 passed by Sessions Judge, Agra in Sessions Trial No.608 of 2015 arising out of Case Crime No.219 of 2015, under Sections 302 and 404 I.P.C., P.S. Kheragarh, District Agra whereby opposite party no.2 has been acquitted from the charges relating to offence punishable under Sections 302 and 404 I.P.C. by extending benefit of doubt.
It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that the Trial Court has not taken into consideration the statement made by Nawal Kishor (P.W.3) who has stated that accused Manish Garg was sitting at the shop of Kapoor Chand when he was going to Basai Nawab for some work at 11.00 A.M.. and when he came back in the house at 12.30 P.M. he found that her mother was murdered. In his statement, he also stated that since her mother (deceased) had filed criminal case for offence punishable under Section 420 I.P.C. against the accused person, therefore, accused persons were annoyed with and inimical towards her mother. There is strong motive to kill her when she was alone at home. It is further submitted that as per post mortem report, there were several ante mortem injuries on the body of the deceased.
While acquitting the accused person the Trial Court has also not appreciated that ring of the deceased was also recovered from the pointing out of the accused. Thus according to learned counsel for the appellant, the chain of circumstantial evidence was complete and therefore the Trial Court ought to have recorded conviction of the accused-respondent.
On going through the impugned judgment, it is apparent that no other circumstance is available to substantiate the charge for which accused person was tried. For the sake of argument even if it is assumed that evidence relating to last seen near the place of the occurrence and motive to kill the deceased were available then the same was not sufficient to record conviction of the accused person. As a matter of fact, the entire prosecution story does not complete the chain of circumstances to arrive at a definite conclusion about involvement of the accused person in the crime in question. As such, we do not find any just reason to grant leave as prayed in the leave to appeal.
The application for leave to appeal is, therefore, rejected and the appeal is accordingly dismissed."
We find that the grounds taken by learned A.G.A. are similar in nature as taken in the abovequoted order.
In such view of the matter, we do not find any good ground to take different view of the matter.
We, therefore, find that it is not a case worth granting leave to appeal. The application for granting leave to appeal is rejected.
Since the application for granting leave to appeal has not been granted, the appeal also stands dismissed.
Order Date :- 26.7.2022
Lalit Shukla
