http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1  

CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.)  1249-1251 of 1999

PETITIONER: STATE OF U.P.

RESPONDENT: SUNDER SINGH & ORS

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 12/04/2005

BENCH: B.P. SINGH & S.B. SINHA

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T

B.P.SINGH,J.

       In this appeal by special leave, the State of Uttar Pradesh has impugned the  common judgment and order of the High Court of  Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow  Bench, Lucknow in Criminal Appeal Nos.590, 598 and 601 of 1979.   The respondents,  herein were  the appellants in the appeals before the High Court, who had challenged the  judgment and order of the VII Addl. Sessions Judge, Hardoi dated 20th July, 1979  convicting the appellants variously under Sections 302/149, 148 IPC, 324/149 IPC.   They  were sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 302/149 IPC and 2 years rigorous  imprisonment both under Sections 148 and 324/149 IPC.        The appeals  preferred  by the respondents were allowed by the High Court by its  judgment and order dated 31st July, 1995.         These appeals arise out of an occurrence which took place on  29.1.1978 at  9.00 A.M. in village Amrita, just outside the house of PW-1 the informant.   In the  occurrence, the respondents herein and some others are said to have attacked the  deceased Hira  Singh, armed with fire arms and lathis, as a result of which the aforesaid  Hira Singh succumbed to his injuries.    The prosecution relied upon the testimony of the  4 witnesses as eye witnesses, namely, PWS.1,2,8&9.   The High Court has found these  witnesses to be unreliable for the reasons recorded by it.         We have gone through the judgment of the High Court and we find that it  has considered the evidence of the witnesses and pointed out the infirmities in their  evidence which dis-credited their testimony.   We find that the appreciation of the  evidence by the High Court is neither perverse nor are the findings recorded  not  supported by evidence on record.  Moreover, the conclusion reached by the High Court is  a possible reasonable conclusion which could be arrived at on the basis of the evidence on  record.         We, therefore, find that this is not a case in which this Court may be justified  in interfering with the order of acquittal.         In the result, we find no merit in these appeals and the same are accordingly  dismissed.         The bail bonds of the respondents are discharged.