Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 23184 (ALL)

CHANDRABHAN v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

C14A1/12/2025 · 2025-10-07

Shekhar Kumar Yadav

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPEAL AGAINST ACQUITTAL IN SC/ST ACT No. - 12 of 2025 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. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Ravindra Prakash Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Chandrabhan .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) 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. October 8, 2025 Krishna* C14A1 No. 12 of 2025 2 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad