Chandrabhan vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 11291 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Chandrabhan vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 8 October, 2025

Author: Shekhar Kumar Yadav

Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:178188
 
 
 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD 
 
APPEAL AGAINST ACQUITTAL IN SC/ST ACT No. - 12 of 2025     
 
   Chandrabhan    
 
  .....Appellant(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State Of U.P. And 2 Others    
 
  .....Respondent(s)         
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Appellant(s)   
 
:   
 
Ravindra Prakash Srivastava   
 
  
 
Counsel for Respondent(s)   
 
:   
 
G.A.   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 86
 
     
 
 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.     

1. Heard Mr. Ravindra Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. S.P. Shukla, learned counsel for the opposite parties no.2 and 3 and learned AGA as well as perused the entire record.

2. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the complainant to set aside impugned order dated 28.11.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T., Basti in Special Session Trial No.41 of 2015 (State Vs. Surya Prakash Mishra and another), under Sections 323, 504, 506 of IPC and Section 3(1)(X) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Nagar, District- Basti.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that specific role has been assigned against the opposite parties no.2 & 3 but the court below without considering the statements of prosecution witnesses, illegally acquitted the opposite parties no.2 & 3. It is further contended that findings recorded by the court below is perverse, illegal, unjust, improper and bad in the eye of law. The impugned order passed by the court below is liable to be set-aside.

4 I have perused the impugned judgement recorded by the trial court.

5. The court's reasoning for acquittal is sound and based on a thorough appreciation of the evidence. The trial court correctly concluded that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, no interference with the trial court's well-reasoned decision is warranted. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. The judgment of the trial court is upheld.

6. Consequently, the appeal is accordingly dismissed.

(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)

October 8, 2025

Krishna*