IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr. Appeal No.316 of 1995. Dated of Decision: August 28, 2009. State of H.P. ……… Appellant. Versus Bhani Ram. ………. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?. For the Appellant : Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Asstt. Advocate General. For the Respondent : Mr. N.K. Thakur, Advocate. Surjit Singh, J (oral): State has appealed against the judgment dated 10.8.1994 of learned Sessions Court, Chamba, whereby respondent, who was charged with and tried for offence of possessing 750 grams of Charas, punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, has been acquitted. According to the prosecution, on 27.2.1994, when S.I. Ramesh Pathania of Police Post, City Chamba, was on patrol duty, he saw the respondent coming from Bus Stand side and going towards Bazaar, near the Circuit House. Respondent was holding ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 a gunny bag. On seeing PW7 Ramesh Pathania, respondent allegedly tried to run away. He was overpowered by PW7 Ramesh Pathania with the help of two independent witnesses, PW4 Manoj Kumar Sarin and one Anu Bakshi, who were accompanying him at that time. PW7 S.I. Ramesh Pathania suspected that the respondent might be carrying Charas in the gunny bag. So he asked the respondent, if he would like to be searched in the presence of a Gazetted Officer or a Magistrate. Appellant opted for being searched on the spot. Writing to this effect was prepared, which is Ex.PG. Thereafter, search of the bag carried by the respondent was conducted. It was found to contain a plastic bag, in which there was Charas-like stuff. 10 grams stuff was separated as sample. The sample and the bulk stuff was made into two separate parcels and sealed with seal that produced the impression of English letter ‘H’. Case property was deposited with PW3 SHO Rai Singh, who affixed his own seal on the two parcels. The impression of the seal affixed by him produced impression of English letter ‘B’. Sample parcel was sent by Moharrar Head Constable PW1 Dalip Singh to the chemical laboratory through PW6 Constable Tara Chand. As per report of the Chemical Examiner Ex.PF, sample contained the contents of Charas. Trial Court has acquitted the respondent on the ground that the independent witness examined by the prosecution does not support the case and testimony of PW7 Ramesh Pathania does not inspire confidence. 3 We have heard the learned Assistant Advocate General as also Shri N.K. Thakur, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the record. Out of the two independent witnesses, who were allegedly accompanying PW7 Ramesh Pathania at the time when the respondent was overpowered, only one, namely PW4 Manoj Kumar Sarin was examined. The witness did not support the prosecution story. PW7 Ramesh Pathania stated that the two witnesses met him in the Bazar at 10.45 p.m. and he associated them with him and that the respondent was found coming from Bus stand side near the Circuit House at 11.15 p.m. The timings testified by him are at variance with the timings mentioned by him in the report Ex.PC, which he sent from the spot for the formal registration of the case. As per contents of Ex.PC, the two witnesses met PW7 Ramesh Pathania at 10.00 and the respondent was apprehended at 10.45 p.m. In view of the above stated position, we do not find this to be a fit case for interfering with the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial court. Hence, appeal is dismissed. (Surjit Singh) Judge August 28, 2009. (Surinder Singh) (Pds) Judge.