Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:141158 Court No. - 81 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL U/S 413 BNSS No. - 242 of 2025 Appellant :- Aftab Ahmad Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Sheetala Prasad Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J. Complainant-Appellant has filed this application seeking leave to appeal under Section 413 B.N.S.S. to challenge the judgment dated 15.2.2025 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Sant Kabir Nagar in Sessions Case No. 155 of 2012, arising out of Case Crime No. 163 of 2011, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C., Police Station Khalilabad, District Sant Kabir Nagar, whereby the trial court has acquitted the accused- respondent nos. 2 and 3 for the offence punishable under Sections 308, 504 I.P.C. Learned counsel for the complainant-appellant has argued that the trial court has not examined the nature of injuries suffered by the injured namely, Badrunisha and Abdul Haleem, who had suffered two injuries each in the alleged occurrence and the accused persons have been convicted for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 323, 506 I.P.C. Learned counsel submits that through the impugned judgment dated 15.2.2025, the accused have been acquitted for the offence punishable under Sections 308, 504 I.P.C. and the said conclusion by trial court is not sustainable, therefore, it calls for interference by this Court. Lastly, it is argued by learned counsel for the appellant that the sentence imposed upon the accused is also disproportionate to their guilt, as they have been extended the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. He prays for grant of leave to challenge the impugned judgment dated 15.2.2025. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and considering his submissions, this Court finds that the injured persons were examined by P.W.-3 Dr. A.K. Srivastava and in paragraph nos.10 and 11 of the judgment the injuries suffered by the injured have been noticed, which are in the nature of swelling on the head, pain on the right shoulder and back, whereas Abdul Haleem had suffered lacerated wound on right eyebrow besides back pain and the nature of these injuries is described as simple. Notably, the F.I.R. was initially registered for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., but during investigation the offence punishable under Section 452 I.P.C. was deleted and Section 308 I.P.C. was added. Thus, considering the nature of injuries and the opinion of the doctor, the case would not fall within the ambit of Section 308 I.P.C., therefore, the acquittal in this regard, is based upon correct appreciation of evidence on record. As far as the sentence part is concerned, the accused had faced protracted trial in respect of the occurrence dated 24.2.2011, who have been convicted through the impugned judgment dated 15.2.2025. Therefore, considering the above background and other attending circumstances, particularly the fact that the accused are not the previous convicts, the trial court has justifiably extended the concession of probation to them. Resultantly, no case is made out for interference and the application is dismissed. Order Date :- 19.8.2025 P.S.Parihar NC413 No. 242 of 2025 2 Digitally signed by :- POORAN SINGH PARIHAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad