IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.A No.398 of 2002 Date of decision : March 24, 2009 State of H.P. …Appellant. Versus Amar Singh and another …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Appellant : Mr. Ramesh Thakur Assistant Advocate General. For the Respondent : Mr. N.K. Thakur, Advocate. Surjit Singh, J ( Oral ) This appeal by the State is directed against the trial Magistrate’s judgment, whereby the respondents, who were tried for offences, punishable under Sections 354, 294, 506 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, have been acquitted. 2. Prosecutrix, examined as PW-1, lodged a report with the police that on 11th March, 1999, at 4.30 p.m., when she was working as a labourer by the roadside, respondent Bharthu came there and hurled abuses and also asked her to have sexual intercourse with him and thereafter he left but a little later the other respondent, named Amar Singh, came there and caught hold of her by her hair and pressed her breasts and kissed her. It was reported that the incident was seen by PW-2 Sumitra and one Man Singh and on seeing those two persons, the respondents ran away from the spot, threatening her that she will be done to death. Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… 3. Police investigated the case and challaned the two respondents. Trial Court put the respondents on trial and finally acquitted them, holding that PW-2 Sumitra did not corroborate prosecutrix’ version and that the prosecutrix’ testimony in the Court was contradicted by the earliest version given by her to the police and, hence, it did not inspire confidence. 4. I have heard the learned Assistant Advocate General on behalf of the appellant and Mr. N.K. Thakur, Advocate, on behalf of the respondents and have also gone through the record. 5. As noticed hereinabove, while lodging the FIR, Ex. PW-3/A, the prosecutrix reported that the two respondents came separately, one after the other, and tried to assault her, with intent to outrage her modesty. As per Ex. PW-3/A, first respondent Bharthu came and hurled abuses and asked her to have sex with him and after he went away second respondent Amar Singh came and tore her clothes and also pressed her breasts and kissed her. However, while in the witness-box she stated that both the respondents came together. Also, she did not testify that respondent Amar Singh pressed her breasts or kissed her, though she did say that he tore her clothes. PW-2 Sumitra did not corroborate her testimony. She stated that only a quarrel had taken place between the respondents and the prosecutrix and the respondents did not use any abusive language nor they did do any act to outrage her modesty. …3… In view of the abovestated position, I do not see any reason to interfere with the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial Court. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. March 24, 2009(sd) ( Surjit Singh ), J