RAM DEV Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.

(2.) Learned counsel for petitioners has submitted that complainant Hari Ram and petitioner no. 1 Ram Dev are the real brother and there was a family dispute regarding ancestral property, which was the bone of contention/motive of the present incident as alleged by the complainant.

(3.) It is further submitted that on perusal of impugned order it reveal that the trial court has not applied its judicial mind. It has rejected application of the prosecutor by observing that charges have been framed and he does not find any ground to allow application of the public prosecutor for withdrawal of the prosecution initiated against the petitioners. On the other hand, the revisional court has exceeded its jurisdiction and re-appreciated the evidence in proceedings of the revision. No reason has been recorded by the trial court, while it passed impugned order dated 22.12.2018. Therefore, order dated 22.12.2018 and impugned judgment 1.7.2019 delivered by the court of learned Sessions Judge, Balrampur/revisional court are not sustainable and liable to be set aside.