IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Defective Govt. Appeal No. 72 of 2002 State of Uttaranchal ……………. Appellant Versus Kaouru @ Kuwar Singh & two others ……….. Respondents Mr. Amit Bhatt, Additional Government Advocate for the State. Mr. Vinod Sharma, Advocate for respondent No. 1 Mr. Pankaj Kaushik, Advocate for respondents No. 2 & 3. Hon’ble Prafulla C.Pant,J. Hon’ble Dharam Veer,J. Learned counsel for the parties are present. 2) This is application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal against the judgment and order dated 22.10.2001, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal, in Session Trial No. 14 of 1997, whereby the respondents are acquitted by the trial court from the charge of offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. and one punishable under Section 201 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. 3) The delay is sufficiently explained in the affidavit filed by Shiv Charan Singh, accompanying the application. Therefore, the application for condonation of delay is allowed. The delay is condoned. 4) Also, heard on leave to appeal. 5) We have gone through the impugned judgment and order dated 22.10.2001, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal, in Session Trial No. 14 of 1997. It is a case of circumstantial evidence, which was based on alleged extra judicial confession to one of the witnesses. After going through the impugned judgment and the lower court record. Which has been summoned, we do not find any sufficient reason to grant the leave to appeal. The leave to appeal is rejected. 6) The appeal stands dismissed in limine. (Dharam Veer, J.) (Prafulla C.Pant,J.) 07.01.2008 07.01.2008 H.Negi