IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No. 5864 of 2011 in CRM-A No. 135-MA of 2011 Date of decision: 23.3.2011 State of Punjab …..Appellant vs. Stephen …..Respondent CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present: - Mr. D. S. Brar, DAG, Punjab for the appellant. HEMANT GUPTA, J CRM No. 5864 of 2011 After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, delay of 53 days in filing the appeal is condoned. Crl. Appeal No. 135-MA of 2011 State is in appeal aggrieved against the order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana on 31.7.2010 whereby Stephen son of Karnail Masih- respondent in the present appeal was acquitted of the charges framed under Sections 302, 304-B read with section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, whereas the other three accused have been convicted i.e. parents-in-law and husband of the deceased. Respondent is the brother-in-law CRM No. 5864 of 2011 in CRM-A No. 135-MA of 2011 of the deceased-Elizabeth. No role is attributed to the respondent-Stephen in the dying declaration of the deceased recorded. As per the prosecution evidence, the respondent was not present at the time of occurrence at Ludhiana, whereas he is the resident of Moga. Learned trial Court has considered the entire evidence and has rightly granted benefit of doubt to the respondent-Stephen. In view of the above, we do not find any illegality in the order passed by learned trial Court on 31.7.2010, which may warrant interference in appeal against the judgment of acquittal. Dismissed. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE 23.3. 2011 (ARVIND KUMAR) preeti JUDGE 2