HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, AT NAINITAL Government Appeal No. 1875 of 2001 (Old No. 409 of 1999) State of U.P. ……..Appellant. Versus Guljar alias Mangla S/o Hameed R/o Village Sikandarpur P.S. Bhagwanpur District Haridwar. ………….Respondent. Shri M.A. Khan, learned Brief Holder for a the State. Coram:Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Oral:- Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard Shri M.A. Khan, learned Brief Holder for the State on leave to appeal, against the judgment and order dated 09.11.1998, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Roorkee, in Sessions Trial No. 271 of 1991, whereby accused/respondent- Gulzar alias Mangta (son of Hameed), is acquitted by said court from the charge of offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. 2. We have considered the submission of learned counsel for the State/appellant and also perused the impugned judgment and order. The deceased is said to have been murdered by her husband (accused/respondent), in the presence of brothers of deceased namely P.W. 2 Shamshad and P.W. 3 Zulfkar. It is nowhere explained by the prosecution what these witnesses were doing in the night when accused/respondent is said to have committed murder of his wife in his Village Sikandarpur. The dead body is said to have been taken into custody by police from the Village Rahimpur, i.e. village of the parents of the deceased. The reasons given by the trial court holding that the charge against the accused/respondent is not proved, is well discussed. We have also perused the lower court record. 3. Leave to appeal is refused. The appeal stands dismissed in limine. (Dharam Veer, J.) (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt: 24.06.2008 Sweta