- (1.) This government appeal under Section 378 Cr.P.C., has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 3.7.2014 passed by Sessions Judge, Siddharth Nagar in S.T. No. 143 of 2009 ( State Vs. Hitendra Rai and others) whereby the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the accused persons under Sections 148, 323/149 and 427 I.P.C. but has acquitted all of them from the charges under Sections 452, 307/149, 504 and 506 I.P.C. Being aggrieved by the acquittal of accused persons under Sections 452, 307/149, 504 and 506 I.P.C. the State has approached this Court praying that the judgment impugned be set aside.
(2.) It is worth mentioning that a perusal of the memo of appeal shows that it has been drafted on the assumption that the entire case has been ended in acquittal of the accused-respondents because every where in the memo of appeal it has been mentioned that the appeal on behalf of the State of U.P. is being preferred against the judgment and order of acquittal. In paragraphs 2 to 6 of the grounds of appeal it is clearly stated that the judgment and order of acquittal of accused-respondents is illegal and erroneous and the court below has committed gross illegality in acquitting the accused respondents. In the prayer column also it has been prayed that the appeal be allowed and the impugned judgment of acquittal be set aside, whereas the impugned judgment shows that the court below has not acquitted the accused persons from all the charges. The trial court has convicted them under Section 148, 232/149 and 427 of I.P.C. as these charges have been found proved against them. However, as the charges under Section 307/149, 452, 504 and 506 of I.P.C. were not found proved against any of them, they were acquitted from the charges under such sections.
(3.) We have heard learned .A.G.A. appearing for the appellant- State of U.P. and have gone through the impugned judgment.;