IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL LEAVE TO GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. 34 of 2009 IN Government Appeal N o. 23 of 2009 (Delay Condonation Appln.No.460/2009) State of Uttarakhand ………. Appellant Versus Vikram Singh S/o Ghasi Singh, R/o Village-Dharampur, Police Station-Jaspur, District-Udham Singh Nagar. ………. Respondent ..……………….. Sri Tanuj Semwal, learned A.G.A. for the appellant. Date: May 05, 2009 Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. [Per : Hon’ble Prafula C. Pant, J.] This is delay condonation application No.460/2009 for condonation of delay in filing the appeal against the judgment and order dated 18.12.2008 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar in Sessions Trial No.23 of 2005. Heard. There is delay of some 34 days in filing the appeal which is sufficiently explained in the affidavit filed by Prabhat Kumar. The application is allowed. Delay is condoned. (Delay condonation application No.460/2009 stands disposed of). Also heard on leave to appeal and perused the impugned judgment and order dated 18.12.2008 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar in Sessions Trial No. 23 of 2005, whereby 2 accused/respondent Vikram Singh has been acquitted of the charges punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. and Section 3(2) 5 of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. It is the case of circumstantial evidence. From the perusal of the impugned judgment, it appears that there is only evidence of deceased last seen with the accused. Merely on that basis the accused could not have been convicted for the offences for which the accused/respondent was charged as the chain of circumstances was not complete. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the State/appellant and after going through the impugned judgment and order passed by the trial court, we do not find it a fit case for granting leave to appeal. Leave is refused. The appeal stands dismissed summarily. (B.S. Verma, J.) (P.C. Pant, J.) 05.05.2009 P.Singh