IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr. A No. 174/2003 Date of decision: 10. 5. 2010 State of H.P. ….Petitioner Versus Manoj Kumar and another ……Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 For the Appellant: Mr. Anshul Bansal, Addl. Advocate General with Mr. J.S. Rana, Assistant Advocate General. For the respondent : Mr. Himat Negi, Advocate. Surinder Singh J. (Oral) Respondents were acquitted by the learned trial Court in Criminal Case No. 132/II/1995 decided on 1.12.1999 for the offences under Sections 323, 325 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code, against which the present appeal has been filed. 2. Leave to appeal was granted on 1.5.2003 and now the appeal has been finally heard. 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?. yes - 2 - 3. In the instant case PW2 Bimla Devi is the complainant. She has clearly admitted that there was a boundary dispute between the parties and that she along with other members of the complainant party had raised the fencing over the land belonging to the respondents. When objected by DW Satya and Prittam, complainant party picked-up the quarrel with them. She further stated that in the scuffle, respondents sustained injuries. DW2 Satya Devi lent strength to the defence raised by the accused persons, which was probablised by the complainant herself. PW8 ASI Subhash Chand also corroborated the fact of sustaining injuries by the accused persons but no explanation was rendered as to how they sustained the injuries. 4. Learned trial Court noticed the above facts which are borne out from the record as such, the acquittal of the respondents cannot be interfered with. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. May 10, 2010 (Surinder Singh),J (cm)