IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Delay Condonation Application No.Nil of 2003 & Special Leave to Appeal Application In Government Appeal No.377 OF 2003 The State ……… Appellant Versus Surya Prakash Kul Shreshtha S/o Raj Kishor R/o Mohalla Manauta Nathu Ram, Kasganj, P.S. Kasganj, District Etah ……… Respondent Dated: September 22, 2010 HON. DHARAM VEER, J. Heard Sri Amit Bhatt, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State/appellant and Sri R.S. Sammal, learned counsel for the respondent. This is delay condonation application no.Nil/2003 for condonation of delay in filing the appeal against the judgment and order dated 25.3.2003, whereby the Additional Sessions Judge/III F.T.C., Nainital acquitted the respondent of the charge levelled against him under Sections 306 and 498-A IPC. The delay is sufficiently explained in the affidavit accompanying the application. The application is allowed. Delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Also heard on leave to appeal and perused the impugned judgment and order dated 25.3.2003 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/III F.T.C., Nainital in Sessions Trial No.153/1997. On a careful perusal of the impugned judgment, it transpires that the trial court has acquitted the respondent on the basis of suicide note written by the deceased and the dying declaration recorded in the hospital. Dying declaration of the deceased is relevant to mention here, which reads as under:- ß eSaus ySfVªu cUn dj ds feV~Vh dk rsy Mkydj ekfpl ls vkx yxk;hA esjs ?kj okyksa dks vkSj esjs ifr dks ijs’kku ugha djuk A esjh cPph dk cgqr [;ky j[kuk blds fy, eSa ftEesnkj gw¡ vkSj fdlh dks eSaus crk;k ugha D;ksafd oks eq>s le>krs vkSj ejus ugha nsrsAÞ Suicide note of the deceased reads as under:- ß eSa tks dqN dj jgha gw¡ viuh LosPNk ls dj jgh gw¡A vr% esjh izkFkZuk gS fd fdlh dks Hkh ijs’kku u fd;k tkos A esjs tkus ds ckn vk’kk gS fd esjh xyfr;ksa dks {kek dj nksxsA esjh xyfr;ksa dk izk;f’pr ;gh gS A vr% eSa iwjs gks’k&gokl esa ;g dj jgh gw¡A eSa lHkh vknj.kh; yksxksa ls {kek pkgrh gw¡A yhtk dks I;kj nsuk dHkh mls ;g er crkuk fd mlus dSlh ek¡ ls tUe fy;k FkkA vkidh izfrek AÞ From the above noted suicide note and dying declaration, it transpires that the deceased committed suicide and neither the respondent nor anyone else is responsible for her death. She committed suicide because of some guilt. Further, there is no evidence against the respondent regarding demand of dowry or cruelty committed by him with the deceased for the same. In the entire suicide note or the dying declaration the deceased has not made any allegation against the respondent. Learned Additional Government Advocate also could not point any mistake in the impugned judgment of the trial court. 2 Having gone through the entire judgment passed by the trial court and hearing learned counsel for the parties, I do not find any illegality or irregularity committed by the trial court in acquitting the respondent. The judgment and order dated 25.3.2003 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge/IIIrd F.T.C., Nainital is correct and justified and requires no interference. For the reasons as aforesaid, I do not find it a fit case to grant leave to appeal. Therefore, the leave to appeal is refused. The appeal stands dismissed. (Dharam Veer, J.) 22.9.2010 RG 3