STATE OF U P Vs. DESH RAJ
LAWS(SC)-2006-3-26
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on March 09,2006

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Appellant
VERSUS
DESH RAJ. Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

AJAY VS. STATE OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2006-11-239] [REFERRED TO]
ARVIND ALIAS CHHOTU VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2009-8-172] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. SHANKAR S O KRISANRAO KHADE [LAWS(BOM)-2008-6-32] [REFERRED TO]
KANTI THAKUR VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2007-4-45] [REFERRED TO]
SHYAM LAL VS. THE RAJASTHAN FINANCIAL CORPORATION [LAWS(RAJ)-2007-7-101] [REFERRED TO]
ANIL KUMAR VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2014-12-19] [REFERRED TO]
MAHESH CHANDER VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2010-4-127] [REFERRED TO]
AJIT RAIZADA VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2011-2-73] [REFERRED TO]
MEWA LAL VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2012-1-109] [REFERRED TO]
MANAGEMENT, SHOZHAVANDAN CO-OPERATIVE PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD VS. PRESIDING OFFICER [LAWS(MAD)-2013-1-477] [REFERRED TO]
SHOLAVANDAN CO-OPERATIVE PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF LABOUR AND ORS. [LAWS(MAD)-2015-2-62] [REFERRED TO]
HANUMAN AND ORS. VS. STATE OF RAJ. [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-8-154] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA CHANDRA YADAV @ JHINKU YADAV VS. REGIONAL MANAGER, CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, LUCKNOW A [LAWS(ALL)-2008-5-259] [REFERRED TO]
RANJIT KUMAR JHA, SON OF SRI DHIRENDRA KUMAR JHA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND [LAWS(JHAR)-2016-8-126] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. ASHOK BABAN MUKANE [LAWS(BOM)-2022-2-82] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)This appeal is preferred by the State of U. P. against the acquittal recorded by the High Court.
(2.)The respondent was put to trial under Section 302/376, IPC. The trial court after conclusion of the trial convicted the respondent and sentenced him to RI for life under Section 302, IPC. The respondent was also sentenced to 7 years RI under section 376, IPC. Aggrieved thereby, the respondent preferred the appeal before the high Court. The High Court by the impugned order acquitted the accused. Hence, the present appeal.
(3.)The story as unfolded by the prosecution is as follows : on 21-2-1979 the prosecutrix, aged about 10 years, stated to be disappeared and was missing. Since the victim girl did not return PW. 1, Braj Lal the father of the complainant made an abortive search for her and thereafter filed an FIR on 22-2-1979 at 8.15 p. m. The case was registered under Sections 302/376, IPC. In the course of the investigation the prosecution examined as many as eight witnesses. The prosecution mainly relied on the evidence of PWs. 2, 5, 6 and 7 who are the witnesses with regard to the last seen of the accused with the victim. Prosecution also examined PW. 3, Dr. A. N. Saxena who conducted the postmortem examination of the deceased. The prosecution also examined PW. l, Braj Lal who is an author of the fir.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.