i!vJSlQ'£S BR''I-R|" i *t«;3 'iu.' B.'f Bi.J' t^.,' ij E t^r E -E IN THE HON'BLE-HISH COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR Cr.M.P No. °^\ I 2011 Api^<cc[n> AWLICAt'ir i5>- Prabha Kashayap, W/o late shri ^^flbcu/.tifl^fea-S) ^. Ramkhilavan K.ashyafth-Vi\\. P,awna,\ P.S- Pamgarh, Dist. Janjgii^(C.6.). yERsus RESPONDENT"S \ 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Polish Station Kota bist. Bilaspur (C.6). ^•'^•^' ..• •" 2. Gore Lal s/o. Bodhiram , ^^{w^ 3^ ^- ^^•\^ ,^* '•^•"'.1''''" \'^'-' ^ \<v .^^3. Ramayan S/OBodhiram Kashyap ^<xJcAsit^4-oy, ••"'"">^<^1^ \y .-A Both are Resident of Vill,Pouna, Police station Pamgarh Dist. Janjgir Champa (C.6) APPLICATIQN_ FOR &RANT OF SPECIAL LEAVE r: Prabha Kashyap, w/o Late Shri RamkhUavan Kashyap aged about 40 yers ViU. Pawna, P.S. Panigarh, Distnct Jaajgir Cham.pa (CG) State of Chliattisgarh, Through PoUce Station- Kota, District Bflaspur (CG) Gore Lal S/o Bodhiram., aged about 30 years Racaayan S/o Bodhirain Kashyap, aged about 40 years, Bofh are resident of vfllage Pouna, PoUce Station Pamgarh, Distnct Janjgir Champa (CG) ACQUITTAL APPEAL U/S 372 OF CR.P.C. earaace: Shri Arvind Dubey, counsel for fbe petitioner. Shri Vi&od Shrivastava, G.A. for the State. Hpa'Me Shti R.L.Jhaawar,JJ (28.2.2011) Present appeal against fhe acquittal of respondents No. 2 and 3 by fhe 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur (CG) in S.T.No. 179/2009 vide judgment dated 19.11.2010 has been chaBenged under the proviso to Sectiou 372 of the Code of ^:^^, ' \\ !SSES'fesa<i 8 ^ Crtmiaal Proceduie along wifh the petitioa for Special Leave to Heaid on I.A.No.l fer condonation of delay in filmg tiie petition. This petition has been preferred after 4 days of its liiuitation. On due consideration, I.A.No.l is aUowed. Delay tu filing fhe petition is hereby condoned. The petition for leave to appeal is unnecessary. Consequenfly, it is dismissed as uiinecessary. Cr.M.P.No.94/2011 staads disposed of. Judgiaent iinpugned and recoid. of Court below perused. Heard Sbri Arviad Dubey, leamed counsel for fhe petitioner aad SIrri Viuod Shrivastava, leanied Goveminent Advocate for the State. As per fh.e judgraent aad arguiaents advanced on behalf of learaed counsel for the petitioner, respondents No. 2 and 3 have been acquitted of the charge on the ground that fhey have not been identified by the witnesses. Conviction is based on circunistantial evidence. As per case of prosecution, respondeuts No. 2 aad 3 accompanied by other connected accused persons; fhey were Iiolding weapons, which have been seized along witll blood stained clofhes at their iD.stances. On fhe ground of non-identification of respondents No. 2 and 3, Court below has acquitted respondents No.2 and 3. On due consideration, we do not find aay itlegality or infinnity in fhe acquittal of respondents No. 2 and 3 in absence of any connectuig evidence. Consequenfly, appeal against the acquittal also liable to be disinissed and it is hereby disinissed. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge Sdl- R,L. .)hanwar judge jtsw,;T»>