RAM PHOOL Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Aditya Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for revisionist, Sri Amod Tripathi, learned counsel for opposite parties 2 to 5 and learned A.G.A. for State.

(2.) This criminal revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C., has been filed aggrieved by judgment and order dated 26.08.2000 passed by Kumari Vijay Laxmi, VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut, in Session Trial No.607 of 1992, acquitting accused Bhagirath, Brahm Singh, Gyani and Dhyan Singh from the offenses under Sections 147, 148, 323, 307 IPC.

(3.) Learned counsel for revisionist contended that incident took place at the residence of revisionist and this fact was duly stated by PW-1 Ram Phool Singh, PW-2 Yash Pal, PW-3 Suneel and PW4 Mast Ram still Court below has held that who was aggressor, this fact could not be proved, and therefore, aforesaid accused were not entitled for acquittal under Sections 147, 148, 323, 307 IPC.