State of U.P. vs Chandan Urf Satish and Another

Bala Krishna Narayana, J.—Heard learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned judgment.

This appeal has been filed by the State against the judgment and order dated 3.6.2011 passed by Special Judge, Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 in Special Sessions Trial No. 19 of 2007, State of U.P. v. Chandan @ Satish and another, u/s 2/3 of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 by which he dismissed the criminal case and acquitted the accused opposite party Nos. 1 and 2.

Learned A.G.A. submitted that the impugned judgment is against the facts of the case and the evidence on record.

After having considered the submissions advanced by the learned A.G.A. and perused the impugned judgment as well as the record of the trial court, I find that the learned Special Judge after a meticulous scrutiny of the facts of the case and consideration of the entire evidence on record oral as well as documentary held that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against the accused opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 u/s 2/3 of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 beyond reasonable doubt and accordingly dismissed the criminal case filed against the opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 and acquitted them..

After going through the impugned judgment as well as the record of the criminal case, I am of the view that the judgment passed by the court below is based upon relevant considerations and supported by cogent reasons and has not been shown to suffer from any illegality, infirmity or perversity warranting any interference by this Court.

The appeal lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.