IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Application for Leave to appeal In Government Appeal No. 48 of 2001 (Old No. 1946 of 1998) State of U.P. … Appellant Versus Aslam … Respondent March 18, 2010 Mr. MA Khan, Brief Holder for the State/appellant. Mr. SMS Mehta, Advocate holding brief of Lokendra Dobhal, Advocate for the respondent. HON. DHARAM VEER, J. The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 6.5.1998 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (UMC), Dehradun in Sessions Trial No. 64/1996. State v. Aslam, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has acquitted the respondent Aslam for the offence punishable under Section under Section 323/308/332 IPC. 2. In compliance of the order dated 4.6.2002 passed by this Court summoning the record of the trial court, Officer-In-charge, Record Room (Civil)/Spl. Judge, Anti-Corruption (CBI), Dehradun vide her report dated 9.7.2009, has reported that the record of the case was burnt in an accident of fire in record room (Civil) in the night of 7.12.1999 and accordingly the burnt record of the case has been transmitted to this Court. 3. The seal of the burnt record was opened on my orders in the Court in the presence of lawyers for the parties. I have seen the burnt record of the case, all the papers of which are illegible and I am of the view that on the basis of these burnt record, this Court is unable to appreciate the evidence adduced during the trial of the case. Learned Brief Holder for the State/appellant, also submitted that after passing of the judgment and order dated 6.5.1998 which is under challenge, a period of more than 11 years have elapsed. He further submitted that now the reconstruction of the record or retrial is also not possible. In a judgment rendered by Allahabad High Court in the case of Aziz Khan Vs. State of U.P. reported in ACC 1992 (29) 223, it was held as under: - “Where record has been lost or destroyed and it is not possible to reconstruct the record, it will not be just or proper to direct the retrial of the case if a long gap has elapsed since the commission of the offence. The occurrence had taken place on 15.10.1976 i.e. 15 years back and the complete record has not been reconstructed; Applying the principle laid down in the above mentioned authorities, we are of the opinion that the appeal of Aziz Khan should be allowed and his conviction and sentence should be set aside and the government appeal against acquittal of accused- respondents is liable to be dismissed.” 4. In the above narrated circumstances and legal proposition (supra), leave to appeal cannot be granted. Hence, application for leave to appeal is hereby rejected. Consequently, the appeal preferred by the State/appellant stands dismissed. The judgment and order dated 6.5.1998 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (UMC), Dehradun in Sessions Trial No. 64/1996. State v. Aslam, is affirmed. (Dharam Veer, J.) 18.3.2010 PRABODH