Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1381 (ALL)

State of U. P. v. Guddu

2016-04-13

ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA-II, SURENDRA VIKRAM SINGH RATHORE

body2016
JUDGMENT (C.M. APPLICATION NO. NIL of 2016-Application for grant of leave to appeal) 2. Heard learned A.G.A. on the application for grant of leave to appeal. 3. This appeal has been preferred by the State against the judgment of acquittal of accused Guddu who is a convict of Sessions Trial No.538 of 2009 arising out of Case Crime No.257 of 2009, under Sections 364, 365 IPC, Police Station Gola, District Kheri. 4. Learned A.G.A. has half heartedly pressed this application for grant of leave to appeal. 5. Perusal of the impugned judgment and evidence shows that the accused Guddu was living in the house of the complainant for the last about 5-6 years. There was some dispute between the complainant and the accused regarding marriage of the appellant with the daughter of Rajendra who happens to be elder brother of the complainant. Accused was not in favour of this marriage while the other side was pressing for the said marriage. 6. The allegation was of kidnapping of a boy namely Priyanshu aged about 5 years. It is an admitted case of the prosecution that the appellant and the alleged kidnappee boy were living in the same house and the trial court has found that there was absolutely no motive to take the kidnappee with him. There was no demand of any ransom. Learned trial court was of the view that the appellant has taken the said boy only for the purpose of playing with him and not commit any offence. The FIR of this case was prepared on 08.03.2009 but it was registered by the police on 10.03.2009. Hence, the FIR was also delayed. 7. After careful perusal of the entire material, we are of the considered view that the view taken by the learned trial court was also correct and by no stretch of imagination, it can be said to be illegal, perverse, irregular or not based on material available on record. 8. Hence, no case for grant of leave to appeal is made out. Accordingly this application for grant of leave to appeal is rejected. U/S 378 CR.P.C. No. - 22 of 2016 State of U.P. Vs Guddu For the Petitioner : Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Surendra Vikram Singh Rathore,J. Hon'ble Anil Kumar Srivastava-II,J. Since, the application for grant of leave to appeal is rejected, therefore, the appeal also stands rejected. 13.4.2016