State
of U.P. Vs. Sunder Singh & Ors [2005] Insc 242 (12 April 2005)
B.P.
Singh & S.B. Sinha B.P.Singh,J.
In
this appeal by special leave, the State of Uttar Pradesh has impugned the common judgment and order of the High
Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow in Criminal Appeal Nos.590, 598 and
601 of 1979. The respondents, herein were the appellants in the appeals before
the High Court, who had challenged the judgment and order of the VII Addl.
Sessions Judge, Hardoi dated 20th July, 1979 convicting the appellants
variously under Sections 302/149, 148 IPC, 324/149 IPC. They were sentenced to
life imprisonment under Section 302/149 IPC and 2 years rigorous imprisonment
both under Sections 148 and 324/149 IPC.
The
appeals preferred by the respondents were allowed by the High Court by its
judgment and order dated 31st
July, 1995.
These
appeals arise out of an occurrence which took place on 29.1.1978 at 9.00 A.M. in village Amrita, just outside the house of PW-1
the informant. In the occurrence, the respondents herein and some others are
said to have attacked the deceased Hira Singh, armed with fire arms and lathis,
as a result of which the aforesaid Hira Singh succumbed to his injuries. The
prosecution relied upon the testimony of the 4 witnesses as eye witnesses,
namely, PWS.1,2,8&9. The High Court has found these witnesses to be
unreliable for the reasons recorded by it.
We
have gone through the judgment of the High Court and we find that it has
considered the evidence of the witnesses and pointed out the infirmities in
their evidence which dis-credited their testimony. We find that the
appreciation of the evidence by the High Court is neither perverse nor are the
findings recorded not supported by evidence on record. Moreover, the conclusion
reached by the High Court is a possible reasonable conclusion which could be
arrived at on the basis of the evidence on record.
We,
therefore, find that this is not a case in which this Court may be justified in
interfering with the order of acquittal.
In the
result, we find no merit in these appeals and the same are accordingly
dismissed.
The
bail bonds of the respondents are discharged.
Back
