IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Special Leave to Appeal Application IN Government Appeal No.81/2001 (Old No.1596/1997) The State …….….…. Applicant/Appellant Versus Deo Singh …….….… Respondent Dated: June 7, 2010 HON. DHARAM VEER, J. The present leave to appeal application has been preferred by the applicant/appellant/State u/s 378(3) of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.) with a prayer to grant leave to the applicant/ appellant/State to file the appeal against the acquittal of the respondent-Deo Singh for the offences punishable u/s 409/468 IPC vide judgment and order dated 26.02.1997 passed by the CJM, Chamoli-Gopeshwar in Criminal Case No.345/1991, State Vs. Deo Singh. Heard Mr. Prabhakar Joshi, learned Brief Holder for the State/applicant/appellant and Sri R.P. Nautiyal, Adv. for the respondent and also perused the trial court record. Learned counsel for the respondent argued that the prosecution has not proved its case against him beyond reasonable doubt for the offences punishable under Sections 409/468 IPC. He further stated that the prosecution witnesses have not clearly stated that the respondent has committed any forgery or criminal breach of trust of the public money. Even the allegation against the respondent is only for an amount of Rs.600/- and that amount was also been deposited by the respondent after some time. He further submitted that it is settled law that when two views are possible, and the view which was taken by the trial court is also possible, then at the appellate stage, the judgment of the trial court should not ordinarily be disturbed. On a careful perusal of the judgment and order passed by the trial court as well as on appreciating the entire material available on record as well as on perusing the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I find that the prosecution could not succeed in proving its case against the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 409/468 IPC. Accordingly, I do not find any good ground to grant leave to appeal to the State. Therefore, the leave to appeal is refused. Leave to appeal application is dismissed. Consequently, the appeal also stands dismissed. Rajeev Dang (Dharam Veer, J.) June 7, 2010