IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.A No.695 of 2001 Date of decision : October 15, 2008 State of H.P. …Appellant. Versus Chain Singh …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Appellant : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General. For the Respondent : Mr. Rakesh Raghuvanshi, Advocate. Surjit Singh, Judge( Oral ) State has appealed against the judgment of the trial Magistrate, whereby respondent, who was tried for an offence, under Section 61(1)(a) of the Punjab Excise Act, as applicable to the State of Himachal Pradesh, has been acquitted. 2. According to the prosecution version, respondent was intercepted at 3 p.m., at a place called Baldoiya, by PW-6 SI Sucha Singh and two police officials accompanying him, namely PW-3 LHC Jagdish Chand and PW-5 HC Sher Singh, when he was carrying a plastic can containing about 2½ bottles of illicit liquor. Sample was taken out from the contents of the can, in a nip, which was sealed, as per requirement of law. Sample was sent to the Chemical Examiner, who opined that the same was of illicit liquor. 3. Prosecution examined the abovenamed three police officials to prove the charge. Trial Magistrate has not believed the Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… evidence of the three police officials, for the reason that there are contradictions in their statements, indicating that the version given by them may not be correct. 4. I have heard the learned Deputy Advocate General and gone through the record. 5. Of course, contradictions are there in the statements of PW-6 SI Sucha Singh, PW-3 LHC Jagdish Chand and PW-5 HC Sher Singh, which make the prosecution version highly doubtful. According to PW-6 SI Sucha Singh, at the site, where the respondent was intercepted, there are no shops nor any houses are situated nearby, but, according to the other two witnesses, three shops were there and it was from one of those shops that bottles for measuring the liquor and the nip, in which sample was secured, were taken. Again, PW-3 LHC Jagdish Chand says that from Police Station the party started on foot and boarded a bus at a place called Guler, but PW-5 HC Sher Singh stated that the party started by a bus from Police Station and reached a place called Dharjot and thereafter the party boarded another bus at a place called Haripur and reached village Baldoiya. The witness stated that the Haripur village is at a distance of three kilometers from Guler. PW-6 SI Sucha Singh could not tell the mode by which the police party travelled to village Baldoiya. 6. In view of the above contradictions, I do not think this to be a fit case for interfering with the judgment of acquittal recorded by the trial Magistrate. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. Appeal stands disposed of. October 15, 2008(sd) ( Surjit Singh ), J