HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 273 of 1983 Court No. - 93 HON'BLE MRS. VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL, J. 1. This Government Appeal has been filed by the appellant, the State of U.P., against the judgment and order dated 27.08.1982 passed by the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Mirzapur, in Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 1982, whereby the learned appellate court acquitted opposite party No. 2 by setting aside his conviction under Section 448 of the Indian Penal Code and also set aside the order of restoration passed under Section 456 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that Sri A.K. Mitra, Chief Town Administrator of the Hindustan Aluminum Corporation Ltd., Renukoot, District- Mirzapur by his letter dated 07.09.1974 (Ext. Ka-1) informed that M/s Hindustan Aluminum Corporation Ltd. had constructed 24 Units of L-type quarters, numbering L-1105 to L-1128 for the allotment to the workmen of various department in terms of the existing rules of the company. Since these quarters were not completed in all respects and certain fistures and electrical appliances were to be fitted in and minor jobs were to be carried out, no allotment was made by the Management in respect thereof. The accused Ram Nath Tiwari along with other workmen entered into these quarters by breaking the locks and forcibly occupied the said quarters and thereby committed the offence of house trespass. 3. On the basis of written report, the case was registered under Section 448 I.P.C. at Police Station- Pipari and was investigated by ASI Ram Bahal Singh. After investigation of the case, charge-sheet was submitted against the accused. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : A.G.A., G.S.Chaturvedi, Palok Basu Counsel for Respondent(s) : Arvind Kumar Singh, R.K.Jain State of U.P. .....Appellant(s) Ram Nath Tiwari .....Respondent(s) 4. The prosecution examined PW-1 M.O. Polas, Camp Incharge Hindalco and PW-2 Constable Deo Raj. They supported the FIR version in their deposition. The accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which he denied the charges. After hearing the arguments advanced by both the parties and considering the evidences on record, the learned Magistrate convicted the accused and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 months and to pay fine of Rs.500 and in default of payment of fine, to undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment. 5. Feeling aggrieved, by the order of the learned Magistrate, the accused preferred an appeal which was decided by the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Mirzapur, on 27.03.1982. The appeal was allowed and the judgment of the conviction and sentence passed by learned Magistrate was set aside and the accused were acquitted of the charges under Section 448 I.P.C. levelled against him. 6. This government appeal has been filed by State of U.P. through Hindalco, Renukoot, Mirzapur. It is alleged that the first appellate court, learned Additional District and Session Judge, Court No.4 has not properly and legally appreciated the evidence brought on record. The accused person has entered into occupation of the premises for which they were not entitled and they had no authority to enter into it. The finding of the learned Sessions Judge that a notice under Section 448 (2) I.P.C. in such case was essential, is against the law and facts of the case. The opinion of the learned appellate court is wholly illegal and liable to be set aside. It is requested that leave to file an appeal may be granted to the State against the order of acquittal dated 27.08.1982 passed by the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Mirzapur, in Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 1982. 7. At the time of hearing on admission, it has been pointed out that the incident in question pertains to the year 1974 and appeal has been filed in the year 1983 and since considerable time has elapsed during the course of hearing, it has been brought to the notice of the Court that the original record of the case has been weeded out in accordance with the rules. A report of Incharge Officer, Record Room District Court, Mirzapur is available on record, in which he has submitted that record of the case was weeded out on 06.06.2008. It has further been informed that the GOVA No. 273 of 1983 2 respondent Ram Nath Tiwari could not be traced for several decades and has surfaced only after about 50 years. 8. Learned Sessions Judge, while acquitting the accused, recorded the clear finding that the essential ingredients of Section 448 I.P.C. were not proved. In particular, it was held that forceable entry with wrong intention was not established and there was no evidence to show that the accused had been asked to vacate the premises either orally or in writing. These findings of fact are based on appreciation of evidence. 9. In view of the extraordinary delay, non-availability of the original record and lapse of about five decades since the occurrence, no useful purpose would be served by admitting the appeal. At this stage, interference in an order of acquittal in such circumstances is neither warranted nor justified. The application under Section 378(3) Cr.P.C. is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the government appeal is dismissed at the stage of admission. February 17, 2026 P. Pandey GOVA No. 273 of 1983 3 (Mrs. Vani Ranjan Agrawal,J.) Digitally signed by :- PUSHPENDRA PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad