IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA. Cr. Appeal No. 187 of 2001 Date of Decision : May 7, 2008 State of H. P. …Appellant. Versus: Ramesh Chand …Respondent. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the appellant: Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A. G. with Ms. Shubh Mahajan, Dy. A. G. For the respondent : Ms. Uma Manta, Advocate. Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral). The present appeal arises out of the judgment dated 18.10.2000 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Court No.2, Mandi, H.P. in Police Challan No. 17-I/99/98, titled as State v. Ramesh Chand, acquitting the accused of the charged offence under sections 457 & 511 of the Indian Penal Code. As per the case of the prosecution, in the night intervening 18th/19th December, 1997, the accused committed house breaking at night by entering into the Anganwari School building in village Malanu, Police Station Balh, Tehsil Sadar, Distt. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Mandi, H.P. with an intention to commit theft therein. Ms. Lata Devi (PW-1) noticed the light of a match stick in the school compound and, therefore, informed her father Shri Kanaya Lal (PW-2) and her sister Ms. Nirmla Devi (PW-4). All the three witnesses reached the building and apprehended the accused before he could commit theft. The matter was reported to the police on 19.12.1997 and the statement of PW-2 under Section 154 Cr.PC (Ext.PW-2/A) was recorded. Based on the same, FIR No. 287/97 (Ext.PW-7/A) dated 19.12.1997 was recorded with Police Station Balh under Sections 457 & 511 IPC. SI Karnail Singh (PW-7) carried out the investigation and with the completion of the same, the challan was presented in the Court for trial. The accused was charged for the offences under Sections 457 & 511 IPC, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In order to prove its case the prosecution examined 7 witnesses and the statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.PC was also recorded. The Court below acquitted the accused as the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt for the reason that the spot witnesses had materially contradicted themselves, rendering the prosecution version to be doubtful. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3 Depositions of PW-1, PW-2 and PW-4 being spot witnesses are relevant. Dr. Sohan Lal (PW-5) has proved on record MLC Ext.PW-5/A from which it is evident that the accused had sustained simple injuries on his body. Shri Karam Singh (PW-6) and SI Karnail Singh (PW-7) carried out the investigation. There is contradiction in the version of PW-7 and that of PW-1 & PW-4 with regard to the place where the proceedings were carried out by the officer during the course of investigation. As per the version of PW-7, the investigation was carried out at the spot whereas the spot witnesses have deposed that investigation was carried out and completed at their house, which is at a distance of ½ km. The version of PW-2 & PW-4, in my view, is not completely reliable and it cannot be said that the prosecution has been able to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. These witnesses have materially contradicted themselves, rendering the prosecution version to be doubtful. As per the version of PW-1, from her house she saw the light of the match stick in the compound of the school. However, as per the version of PW-4, PW-1 had informed her that electric light was seen in the compound of the school. From the testimonies of PW-1, PW-2 & PW-4, it is clear that the school is at a distance of ½ km. and it takes approximately 5 minutes to reach from their house to the school. It is unbelievable that the light of match stick could be seen from a distance of ½ km. This castes a doubt in the prosecution story itself. Further, the lock 4 which is alleged to have been broken by the accused was not taken into possession by the Investigating Officer. All the spot witnesses have deposed that there are no houses in close vicinity of the place of occurrence, yet they have deposed that on hearing their cries people assembled at the spot. The incident is alleged to have taken place during winter session at about 10-11 P.M. in the night intervening 18th/19th December, 1997, therefore, it is unbelievable that passer byes would have reached the spot hearing cries of the witnesses. In any event, why these witnesses were not examined by the prosecution to corroborate the version of the spot witnesses has not been explained. The accused has sustained injuries on his body. The prosecution has not been able to explain the same. The investigating agency ought to have investigated the matter in its entirety and brought the complete truth on record. The Court below has considered the material in its entirety and there is no perversity or illegality in the same. The accused has had the advantage of having been acquitted by the Court below. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. Bail bonds stand discharged. May 7, 2008 ( Sanjay Karol ), (rana) Judge.