Allahabad High Court

STATE OF U.P.versusRAM NATH TIWARI

Decided: 16 February 2026
Bench: VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL

Holding

The appeal is dismissed; the order of acquittal under Section 448 IPC stands.

Summary

The State of U.P. appealed to the Allahabad High Court against the acquittal of Ram Nath Tiwari by the Additional Sessions Judge, who set aside his conviction under Section 448 of the Indian Penal Code for house trespass. The prosecution alleged that Tiwari and other workmen forcibly entered and occupied unfinished company quarters, constituting house trespass. The Sessions Judge held that the essential ingredients of Section 448 – forcible entry with wrongful intention and a demand to vacate – were not proved and acquitted the accused. The State contended that the appellate court erred in its appreciation of evidence and that a notice under Section 448(2) was essential. The High Court, noting the extraordinary delay of over five decades, the loss of original records, and the inability to locate the accused for many years, dismissed the government appeal at the admission stage, finding no purpose in revisiting the acquittal.

Issues considered

Whether the High Court can entertain a government appeal under Section 378(3) of the CrPC despite the extreme delay and loss of original records.
Whether the elements of Section 448 IPC – forcible entry with wrongful intention and a demand to vacate – were sufficiently proved to sustain a conviction.
Whether the Additional Sessions Judge erred in setting aside the conviction and the order of restoration under Section 456 CrPC.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 378(3), 456
Indian Penal Code — s. 448

Subjects

house trespass
Section 448 IPC
criminal appeal
delay in prosecution
loss of records
acquittal
Code of Criminal Procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 273 of 1983

State of U.P.
.....Appellant(s)
Versus

Ram Nath Tiwari
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s) : A.G.A., G.S.Chaturvedi, Palok Basu
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Arvind Kumar Singh, R.K.Jain

Court No. - 93
HON'BLE MRS. VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL, J.

1. This Government Appeal has been filed by the appellant, the State of
U.P., against the judgment and order dated 27.08.1982 passed by the IV
Additional Sessions Judge, Mirzapur, in Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 1982,
whereby the learned appellate court acquitted opposite party No. 2 by
setting aside his conviction under Section 448 of the Indian Penal Code
and also set aside the order of restoration passed under Section 456 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that Sri A.K. Mitra, Chief Town
Administrator of the Hindustan Aluminum Corporation Ltd., Renukoot,
District- Mirzapur by his letter dated 07.09.1974 (Ext. Ka-1) informed
that M/s Hindustan Aluminum Corporation Ltd. had constructed 24 Units
of L-type quarters, numbering L-1105 to L-1128 for the allotment to the
workmen of various department in terms of the existing rules of the
company. Since these quarters were not completed in all respects and
certain fistures and electrical appliances were to be fitted in and minor
jobs were to be carried out, no allotment was made by the Management in
respect thereof. The accused Ram Nath Tiwari along with other workmen
entered into these quarters by breaking the locks and forcibly occupied
the said quarters and thereby committed the offence of house trespass.

3. On the basis of written report, the case was registered under Section
448 I.P.C. at Police Station- Pipari and was investigated by ASI Ram
Bahal Singh. After investigation of the case, charge-sheet was submitted
against the accused.
GOVA No. 273 of 1983
2

4. The prosecution examined PW-1 M.O. Polas, Camp Incharge Hindalco
and PW-2 Constable Deo Raj. They supported the FIR version in their
deposition. The accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in
which he denied the charges. After hearing the arguments advanced by
both the parties and considering the evidences on record, the learned
Magistrate convicted the accused and sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for 6 months and to pay fine of Rs.500 and in default of
payment of fine, to undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment.

5. Feeling aggrieved, by the order of the learned Magistrate, the accused
preferred an appeal which was decided by the IV Additional Sessions
Judge, Mirzapur, on 27.03.1982. The appeal was allowed and the
judgment of the conviction and sentence passed by learned
Magistrate was set aside and the accused were acquitted of the charges
under Section 448 I.P.C. levelled against him.

6. This government appeal has been filed by State of U.P. through
Hindalco, Renukoot, Mirzapur. It is alleged that the first appellate court,
learned Additional District and Session Judge, Court No.4 has not
properly and legally appreciated the evidence brought on record. The
accused person has entered into occupation of the premises for which they
were not entitled and they had no authority to enter into it. The finding of
the learned Sessions Judge that a notice under Section 448 (2) I.P.C. in
such case was essential, is against the law and facts of the case. The
opinion of the learned appellate court is wholly illegal and liable to be set
aside. It is requested that leave to file an appeal may be granted to the
State against the order of acquittal dated 27.08.1982 passed by the IV
Additional Sessions Judge, Mirzapur, in Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 1982.

7. At the time of hearing on admission, it has been pointed out that the
incident in question pertains to the year 1974 and appeal has been filed in
the year 1983 and since considerable time has elapsed during the course
of hearing, it has been brought to the notice of the Court that the original
record of the case has been weeded out in accordance with the rules. A
report of Incharge Officer, Record Room District Court, Mirzapur is
available on record, in which he has submitted that record of the case was
weeded out on 06.06.2008. It has further been informed that the
GOVA No. 273 of 1983
3

respondent Ram Nath Tiwari could not be traced for several decades and
has surfaced only after about 50 years.

8. Learned Sessions Judge, while acquitting the accused, recorded the
clear finding that the essential ingredients of Section 448 I.P.C. were not
proved. In particular, it was held that forceable entry with wrong intention
was not established and there was no evidence to show that the accused
had been asked to vacate the premises either orally or in writing. These
findings of fact are based on appreciation of evidence.

9. In view of the extraordinary delay, non-availability of the original
record and lapse of about five decades since the occurrence, no useful
purpose would be served by admitting the appeal. At this stage,
interference in an order of acquittal in such circumstances is neither
warranted nor justified. The application under Section 378(3) Cr.P.C. is
liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the government appeal is dismissed
at the stage of admission.

(Mrs. Vani Ranjan Agrawal,J.)
February 17, 2026
P. Pandey

Digitally signed by :-
PUSHPENDRA PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…