- (1.)The state is in appeal against the order of acquittal passed by the High Court in proceeding initiated against the accused persons under sections 395 and 397 of the indian Penal Code.
(2.)Admittedly, there is no dispute as regards the incident spoken of neither the damage caused. The only question that came for consideration before the Court was with regard to the identity of the accused persons. In the first information report, it has been mentioned that the dacoits had covered their faces with towels; that during the 'marpeet' in course of the commission of dacoity, the faces of the co-accused opened and they could be recognised. In cross-examination, however, the witnesses did turn round and categorically stated that mask of none of the dacoits got opened up, it is by reason of this inconsistent and contradictory piece of evidence as is available on record the High Court came to the conclusion that the prosecution has miserably failed in its effort to prove as is required in terms of the provisions of law and thus the appellant deserved to be acquitted and hence the High Court allowed the appeal and conviction and sentence of the appellant was set aside.
(3.)The state of Uttar Pradesh, however, not being satisfied therewith prefers this appeal upon the grant of leave.