Crl. Revision No. 2536 of 2008 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Revision No. 2536 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision:- 16.08.2011 Vijender Sharma ....Petitioner Vs. Ghanshyam and another ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL Present:- Mr. Gautam Dutt, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. Amit Rana, DAG, Haryana, for the respondent-State. ***** A.N. JINDAL, J (ORAL) Assailed in this petition is the judgment dated 14.12.2007 passed by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Faridabad, whereby accused-respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused') was acquitted. The case sans any direct evidence, but is based on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution has relied upon two pieces of evidence against the accused, viz. one with regard to extra judicial confession made by accused Ghanshyam before Pradhan Singh (PW-6) and secondly, recovery of the knife. As regards the extra judicial confession made before Pradhan Singh (PW-6), he though was examined-in-chief, yet did not turn up to the Court for cross-examination by the counsel for Crl. Revision No. 2536 of 2008 (O&M) 2 the accused. Therefore, his testimony cannot be treated to be an evidence in terms of the Evidence Act, as the accused was not provided opportunity to test his veracity by way of cross- examination. Consequently, his testimony by way of examination- in-chief would be taken off the consideration. As regards the alleged recovery of knife, the same was not produced in the Court. Even, mere recovery of knife is hardly a sufficient circumstance to connect the accused with the commission of crime. As regards the judgment of conviction recorded by the trial Court as well as this Court qua Shyam-accused in the case Shyam and another Vs. State of Haryana, Crl. Appeal No.603- DB of 2000 (decided on 22.05.2006), as relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner, is based on concrete evidence against him. Therefore, the case of the respondent being distinguishable from that of Shyam, no reliance could be placed on the same. In the given circumstances, this Court while concurring with the judgment recorded by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Faridabad, acquitting Ghanshyam-accused, a juvenile, dismisses the petition. (A.N.JINDAL) 16th of August, 2011 JUDGE ajp