IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 276 of 1999 Date of decision: 01.06.2010 State of H.P. ... Appellant Versus Karnail Singh … 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. Anuj Nag, Advocate. Per V.K. Ahuja , J. (Oral): This is an appeal filed by the State of H.P. under Section 378 Cr.P.C. against the judgment of the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nurpur, dated 1.12.1997, vide which the respondent was acquitted of the notice of accusation put up to him under Sections 224 and 353 I.P.C. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that a Ruka Ext. PW3/A was sent to the Police Station containing statement of Baldev Singh Ext. PW3/B, alleging that the respondent was being taken in custody to the Police Post by PW-4 Onkar Singh, constable and he escaped from the police custody after pushing the said Onkar Singh, constable. On this basis, on 21.4.1993, FIR Ext. PW6/A was registered against the respondent and after investigation, the challan was filed 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 before the learned trial Court, who tried the respondent, leading to his acquittal. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case. 4. On appraisal of the evidence led by the prosecution, it is very much clear that the prosecution had examined 7 witnesses to substantiate their case including PW-4 Onkar Singh, constable and PW-3 Hari Ram, ASI, who were taking respondent from Police Station to Police Post and in the meanwhile, the respondent escaped. The reasoning given by the learned trial Court for acquitting the respondent is that there is no evidence on record to show that the accused had been arrested in case FIR No. 61/1993 under Section 382 I.P.C., when he was brought from Police Station Shahpur to Police Post Kotla. 5. The ingredients of Section 224 I.P.C. stands proved only if there is evidence to show that the accused had been arrested and his arrest has been shown in a case and once he is under arrest in the case and he escapes from the custody of the police he can be said to have committed offence under Section 224 I.P.C. In the present case, the prosecution has not led any evidence to show that formal arrest of the accused was shown in case FIR No. 61/1993 under Section 382 I.P.C. when he was being taken from Police Station Shahpur to Police Post Kotla. The material evidence could have been produced by the prosecution to show that the formal arrest of the accused has been made in the said FIR was case diary, for which there is no evidence and as such, I do not find any infirmity in the 3 judgment passed by the learned trial Court to be 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. The bail bonds furnished by respondent shall stand discharged. ( V.K. Ahuja ), June 01, 2010 Judge (BSS) 4