IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 398 of 2004. Date of Decision: 7.1.2011. _______________________________________________ State of H.P. …Appellant. Versus. Nait Mohammad. ….Respondent. Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge. Whether approved for reporting1? No. For the appellant. :Mr.P.K.Sharma, Addl. Advocate General. For Respondents. :Mr. J.R.Poswal, Advocate. Dev Darshan Sud, J.(Oral). The State is aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Una. The case against the respondents was that they were in possession of 40 scants of khair wood which had been cut from the Government Forest at village Polian. The accused was punished for offences under Section 379 I.P.C. and Section 41 and 42 of the Indian Forest Act. In order to prove its case, the prosecution produced PW1 Ranjodh Singh who has turned hostile by stating that nothing has been recovered in his presence and his statement was not recorded by the police. Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 In these circumstances, the Court holds that there is no independent corroboration with respect to the recovery of 40 scants of khair wood. The court also holds that these khair wood scants were proved by the site plan Ext.PW9/B to have been recovered near the bushes and Jhuggies . In these circumstances, it was incumbent upon the prosecution to establish that these scants were in the exclusive possession of the accused and nobody else. There is no evidence led by the State that these scants trees were removed from the Government Forest. In the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any merit in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed. Bail bonds furnished by the respondents shall stand discharged. (Dev Darshan Sud), Judge. January 7, 2011(R)