IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.93 of 2008. Date of decision: 26.2.2008. State of H.P. …….Petitioner Vs. Jagdish Thakur …. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Appellant : Mr. A.K. Bansal, Additional Advocate General. For the Respondent : None. Kuldip Singh, Judge.(Oral) This petition has been filed for seeking leave to file appeal against the judgment dated 7.11.2007 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Shimla in Cr. Appeal No.4-S/10 of 2007, acquitting the respondents under Sections 406 and 417 IPC. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 4.2.2004 PW-3 Seema daughter of PW-1 Kahan Chand was admitted at IGMC, hospital, Shimla. Sushma daughter of PW-2 Tara Chand was also admitted in the same ward. The respondent came there to meet Sushma. On 6.2.2004 at about 11 AM respondent had shown one slip to PW-4 Karam Chand and demanded Rs.1500/- from him on the ground that doctor had advised medicines to Sushma. The Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes …2… respondent told PW-4 Karam Chand that when PW-2 Tara Chand would come, he will return the amount to him. On this Karam Chand gave Rs.1500/- to respondent and respondent thereafter never returned. On these facts, it is alleged that respondent has cheated PW-4 Karam Chand by deceiving him fraudulently to deliver Rs.1500/- which was converted by respondent for his own use. On the complaint by complainant, FIR Ex.PW-5/A was registered. The respondent was charged under Section 406 and 417 IPC, the prosecution examined six witnesses and statement of respondent was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The respondent did not lead any defence evidence. The learned trial Magistrate convicted the respondent under Section 406 and 417 IPC vide judgment dated 23.12.2006 and on 26.12.2006 sentenced the respondent simple imprisonment for a period of three months and a fine of Rs.500/- for offence under Section 406 IPC and for offence under Section 417 IPC, the respondent was sentenced for a period of three months and a fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine the respondent was further to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The respondent filed appeal before the learned Sessions Judge which was allowed on 7.11.2007 and the respondent was acquitted as noticed above. Hence the State has filed the application for leave to file appeal. 3. It is not the prosecution case that the respondent was entrusted Rs.1500/- by PW-4 Karam Chand with a direction to utilize Rs.1500/- in a particular manner. There is no allegation that the …3… person for whom Rs.1500/- were obtained by respondent from Karam Chand was not actually ill or that respondent did not purchase the medicines. The learned Sessions Judge has rightly appreciated the material on record and has come to the right conclusion that liability, if any, is of civil nature and no offence has been committed by the respondent. No case for leave to file appeal has been made out, hence leave to appeal rejected. ( Kuldip Singh ) Judge. February 26, 2008 (sks)