IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous Appeal No.310-MA of 2009 Date of Decision: March 31, 2010 State of Punjab .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS Amarjit Pal Singh .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Rajni Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for the appellant. Mr. Manish Kumar Singla, Advocate, for the respondent. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) The State has carried an appeal against judgment of acquittal dated 6.2.2009 rendered by the Special Judge, Faridkot. The relevant discussion is contained in Para 11 and 12 of the judgment. It has been recorded that as per PW-1, Premjit Singh (complainant), after the raid and recovery of the tainted money from the accused, solution of water and Sodium Carbonate was prepared by the investigating officer. When the hands of the official witness, Ujjagar Singh Garcha (PW-3) were dipped therein, the colour of the solution did not change, however, when the hands of accused, Amarjit Pal Singh Crl. Misc. Appeal No.310-MA of 2009 [2] (respondent) were dipped, the colour of the solution turned pink. Under the circumstances, it has been concluded that there is suspicion in the prosecution story in so much as there is a possibility that Ujjagar Singh (PW-3) was not present at the spot. Likewise, it has been concluded that the motive for demanding illegal gratification has not been established in so much as, the case set up by the prosecution is that the accused demanded and accepted illegal gratification for doing a favour to the complainant in his official capacity by not reporting in regard to the excessive electricity load being used by the complainant. Nothing has been brought on record to suggest that the complainant was ever found using excessive load of electricity. Be that as it may, learned counsel for the appellant has also not been able to indicate any fault, in law or in facts, with the findings recorded by the Trial Court. No ground for interference is made out. Dismissed. (AJAI LAMBA) March 31, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?