- (1.) Heard learned AGA Sri H.M.B. Sinha and Sri Rahul Singh Tomar, learned counsel for the accused-respondent, on the application seeking leave to appeal as well as the appeal itself, against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 09.10.2012, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.5, Muzaffarnagar, in Session Trial No.712 of 2010(State Vs. Kamal Kumar Gupta), arising out of Case Crime No.1597 of 2009 by means of which the accused person has been acquitted for the offence punishable under Sections 302, IPC , Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Muzaffarnagar.
(2.) Even though the learned A.G.A. has very strongly pressed the application, but it could not be denied that the present case is based upon circumstances evidence and there is no direct evidence whatsoever. As far as the circumstances evidence is concerned, the court concerned while discussing the evidence has clearly observed herein as under, with regard to the three witnesses who were examined. The relevant extract of the statement of all the three witnesses is being extracted herein below:- ....[VARNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]....
(3.) We have perused the judgment and order dated 09.10.2012 and the findings as recorded therein. The Court has clearly held that the present case is of circumstantial evidence and the important links and the chains are missing and thus, the Court has exercised the option of returning the verdict of acquittal. After perusal of the impugned judgment shows that the trial court after a thorough marshalling of the facts of the case and a microscopic scrutiny of the evidence on record has held that the prosecution has failed to prove the charge against the accused respondent and the findings recorded by the learned trial judge in the impugned judgment are based upon evidence and supported by cogent reasons. It is an established position of law that if the court below has taken a view which is a possible view in a reasonable manner, then the same shall not be interfered with. ;