IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Appeal No. 174 of 2011 Adesh Kumar S/o late Shri Nathu Ram Yadav, R/o Shankaracharya Chowk, Mayapur, Kankhal, District Hardwar. …….…….. Appellant Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand, 2. Triloki S/o Ramjas Kurmi, 3. Naresh S/o Shyam Lal Yadav, 4. Babu Lal S/o Mahilal Kurmi, 5. Sunil S/o Rafatpal Singh, Respondent No.2 to 5 are R/o Dam Kothi Colony, P.S. Kotwali, District Hardwar. .….............. Respondents Present: Mr. Narendra Bali, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Amit Bhatt, A.G.A. for the State/respondent No.1. Mr. Nagesh Agarwal, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 to 5. Coram : Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, Chief Justice Hon’ble U.C. Dhyani, Judge Date : 25th November, 2011 JUDGMENT Barin Ghosh, C. J. (Oral) The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 18th December, 2010 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, First Fast Track Court, Hardwar in Sessions Trial No. 317 of 1996, whereby and under, of the five accused persons, one, namely, Jungi alias Ram Singh Yadav has been convicted under Section 302 of I.P.C. and also under Section 25 of the Arms Act and the remaining four accused persons, who were charged to have committed offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. have been acquitted. Against acquittal of those four accused persons, the State preferred an appeal alongwith leave to appeal and condonation of delay in preferring the appeal. Application for condonation of delay in preferring the said appeal as well as leave to prefer the appeal was accorded, whereupon the Government appeal was heard by a 2 Division Bench of this Court who, by its order dated 28th April, 2011, dismissed the said appeal. The present appeal is by the victim, which is barred by limitation. 2. Since no objection to the application for condonation of delay in preferring the appeal has been filed and considering the averments made in the application made therefor, we allow the application but, at the same time, we dismiss the appeal on the ground that a similar appeal has been dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court upholding examination of evidence made by the trial court, which established that there was no common intention or common object on the part of the respondents herein. (U.C. Dhyani, J.) ( Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 25.11.2011 25.11.2011 P. Singh