IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.A No.35 of 2000 Decided on : August 12, 2010 State of H.P. …Appellant. Versus Kishan Chand …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Appellant : Mr. Vivek Thakur, Additional Advocate General. For the Respondent : Mr. N.K. Thakur, Advocate. Deepak Gupta, J (Oral) This appeal by the State is directed against the judgment dated 15th September, 1999 delivered by the learned Sessions Judge, Chamba, in Criminal Appeal No.8 of 1997, whereby he set aside the judgment dated 5th June, 1997 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Chamba, in Criminal Case No.29-II of 1993, convicting the accused of having committed offences punishable under Sections 457 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-, under Section 457 of the Indian Penal Code, and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- for offence under Section 380 of the Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. …2… Indian Penal Code. In case of default of payment of fine, the accused was to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of three months, each under both the counts. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. Prosecution story in brief is that complainant Jagdish Chand had constructed a house in village Thamoh in Tehsil Pangi of District Chamba. He had inducted one Lachhmi Nath as tenant in a portion of this house. Complainant Jagdish Chand was posted at Keylong and used to reside there. On 26th June, 1992, tenant Lachhmi Nath noticed that the lock of the portion of the house belonging to the landlord was broken. On going inside, he noticed that the trunks were broken and the belongings were lying scattered. Therefore, he brought these facts to the notice of Prem Lal, a brother of Jagdish Chand, who in turn informed Jagdish Chand about the fact. Thereafter, Jagdish Chand and his wife Ram Dei came to the village and found jewellery items and some cash missing in the house. FIR was lodged at Police Station, Pangi. 3. On 10th July, 1992, the accused was allegely caught red-handed while he was selling the ornaments in Chamba Bazaar at the shop of PW-21 Ashok Kumar and was apprehended. Thereafter, PW-22 Narinder Singh, a brother of complainant Jagdish Chand, was called and one gold chain was taken into possession. PW-22 Narinder Singh identified the gold chain to be that of the complainant. …3… Thereafter, the accused was arrested and it is alleged that when he was in custody he made one disclosure statement on 12th July, 1992 Ex. PW-5/C and got recovered golden ring Ex.P-3 from the shop of one J.R. Chauhan (not examined), which was taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex. PW-5/D. Thereafter, on 23rd July, 1992, the accused made another disclosure statement Ex. PW-5/A and on the basis of this statement accused led the police to the shop of PW-17 Ajay Kumar from where Dod Mala Ex. P-1 and Pajeb Ex. P-2 were recovered, which were taken into possession vide recovery memo Ex. PW-5/B. 4. The accused is alleged to have made another disclosure statement on 26th July, 1992 Ex. PW-9/A in the presence of PW-9 Kishori Lal and one Ramesh Kumar, leading to the discovery of some part of the sold property from the shop of Satish Kumar, vide recovery memo Ex.PW- 9/B. The accused also made another disclosure statement Ex. PW-7/B, which led to the discovery of one Chimta. 5. The accused has been linked with the offences only on the basis of the aforesaid recoveries. 6. Learned lower Appellate court has acquitted the accused on the following grounds: Firstly that Narinder Singh not being the owner of the ornaments could not have identified the same. It has also come in evidence that when the ornaments were got identified from Ram Dei, they were not mixed up with other …4… ornaments by the Executive Magistrate (PW-1). Therefore, there was no proper identification. Even the FIRs on the basis of which prosecution was launched, i.e. the FIR lodged at Chamba and the FIR lodged at Pangi, were not exhibited in evidence. Learned lower Appellate Court also found that PW-18 and PW-21, who were the shop-keepers, from whose shops the alleged stolen articles were recovered, had not supported the prosecution case and they clearly stated that they were compelled to sign the seizure memos. PW-21 Ashok Kumar stated on oath that he had filed a complaint against the police with the Deputy Commissioner, Chamba and that the ornaments, which belonged to him, were taken into possession by the police and he was compelled to sign the recovery memo. In view of the above, the learned lower Appellate Court was justified in acquitting the accused. There is no merit in the present appeal, which is accordingly dismissed. ( Deepak Gupta ), J August 12, 2010(sd) ( Sanjay Karol ), J