UKHC010120762026 2026:UHC:5809 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS SPLA/148/2026 Ram Chandra --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Naveen Singh Bisht, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Addl. Advocate General with Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. The fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence is presumption of innocence and order of acquittal further strengthen the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused person(s) and the Appellate Court should be slow in interfering with the order of acquittal, particularly, when the trial court has evaluated the evidence and examine the statement of witnesses and order of acquittal can only be interfered with if the findings of trial court are found to be perverse or based on total misreading of the evidence available on record. 4. This application for leave to appeal is preferred under Section 419 (4) of BNSS, 2023, by the present applicant Ram Chandra against the judgment and order dated 07.05.2026 passed by Special Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, in Special Sessions Trial No. 598 of 2023, (State Vs. Smt. Meena Kumari and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 89 of 2023 whereby trial court acquitted the accused persons from the charge of offences punishable under Section 323, 506 IPC and under Section 3 (1) (r) (s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station – ITI, District UKHC010120762026 2026:UHC:5809 – Udham Singh Nagar. 5. In the present case, the trial court has meticulously analysed the testimonies of prosecution witnesses PW1 to PW8 and pointed out material contradictions. The trial court has rightly observed that the chain of evidence was not complete to definitely point out the guilt of the accused. The scope of leave to appeal is very limited only to examine whether there are compelling reasons to entertain the leave to appeal or not and in the present case, learned counsel for the applicant has not pointed out any glaring illegality or omission of material evidence or procedural error committed by the trial court. The view taken by the trial court is entirely based on evidence presented before it. 6. Consequently, I do not find any substantial or compelling reason to grant special leave to appeal. Accordingly, application for special leave to appeal is dismissed. Consequently, CRLA No. 409 of 2026 is also dismissed. Judgment and order dated 07.05.2026 passed by Special Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, in Special Sessions Trial No. 598 of 2023, (State Vs. Smt. Meena Kumari and others) is hereby affirmed. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 14.07.2026 SKS