IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.Appeal.No.: 559/2010 Date of decision: 22.12.2011. State of H.P. … Appellant Versus Ajay Kumar, son of Kapoor Chand,r/o Lahla, Tehsil Palampur District Kangra. …….Respondent Coram : The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the appellant : Mr. J.S Guleria, Assistant Advocate General, For the respondent : Mr. Lakshey Thakur Advocate. V.K. Ahuja, J.(Oral) This is an appeal filed by the State of H.P against the judgment of the court of learned Judicial Magistrare, Ist Class (1), Palampur, District Kangra H.P. dated 21.6.2010 vide which he acquitted the respondent of the charge framed against him under section 419 I.P.C. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that one Ashwani Kumar( hereinafter also referred to as complainant) had applied for HPAS Preliminary Examination , 2004 and he did not receive the call letter and accordingly filed a complaint with the Secretary, H.P. Public 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2 Service Commission. On inquiry, it was found that one candidate Ajay Kumar i.e accused who had not applied for the examination, appeared for the examination on the call letter issued to the complainant and accordingly the complaint EX.PW1/A was sent to S.P. Police, Kangra. The matter was investigated and after investigation the challan under Section 419 I.P.C was filed against the respondent who was tried by the learned trial Court, as detailed above, leading to his acquittal. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case. 4. It is clear from the facts proved on record that the respondent had also applied for the post of Clerk while the complainant had applied for the post of HPAS examination,2004. The call letter EX.D-1 was received by the respondent and perusal of the same shows that the name of the candidate only is mentioned but the father’s name is not mentioned. It is also clear that the complainant and the accused are both residents of the same village. The accused received the call letter and presuming that it was in pursuance of the application submitted by him he appeared in the examinations, though both the examinations were different. However, the records show that the accused appeared and he had also affixed his photographs on the attendance sheet EX.PW5/A. There is nothing on record to show that he personated the complainant and appeared in his place in the examination on the call letter issued in the name of Ajay Kumar. The prosecution has failed to establish that the respondent had managed in any manner to receive the call letter from the Postal Authorities fraudulently. The facts show that it was received at his residence and he appeared for the examination. 5 The learned trial Court had considered the facts of the case and had rightly come to the conclusion that dishonest intention of 3 the accused was not there and there was no proof of cheating by personation proved by the prosecution. Therefore, learned trial Court had rightly concluded that the guilt of the accused is not establish beyond reasonable doubt and these findings cannot be termed as perverse calling for an interference by this Court. 6 In view of the above discussion, I accordingly hold that there is no merit in the appeal filed by the appellant which is dismissed accordingly. Bail bonds furnished by the respondent stands discharged. (V.K Ahuja), Judge 22nd December,2011 (veena)