STATE OF U P Vs. SITA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Sri R.Y. Pandey, learned A.G.A., appearing for the appellant-State, and Sri Rahul Mishra, appearing on behalf of accused-respondents. Perused the record.

(2.) This government appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 4.6.1983 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Pilibhit, in S.T. No. 207 of 1982, acquitting the accused-respondent, Sita Ram charged under Section 302 IPC and accused-respondent, Dharam Pal charged under Section 302/149 IPC.

(3.) The appeal has been challenged on the ground; that learned Sessions Judge committed manifest error of law in rejecting the testimony of the eye-witnesses holding that the investigation of the case was not efficient as the first information report in the case was too prompt and does not inspire confidence. It is also challenged on the ground that prosecution case was amply proved from the statements of three eye witnesses which find material corroboration between the medical evidence and other attending circumstances on record; that acquittal of the accused persons is wholly unwarranted, bad in law and being against the weight of evidence on record, as such, judgment is perverse.