IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr.M.P. (M) 1119 of 2008. Date of Decision: 3.11. 2008. _______________________________________________________________ State of H.P. Appellant Versus Siridhar and others Respondents. Coram Hon’ble Mr.Justice S.S.Thakur ,J. Whether approved for reporting1? No. For the Appellant : Mr. J.S. Guleria, Law Officer For the respondent : ___________________________________________________________ Surinder Singh, J, (oral). Heard. The instant petition, for leave to appeal has been filed by the State, assailing the judgment of acquittal, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hamirpur in Cr. Appeal No.34 of 2007, dated 18.7.2008 whereby the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial court in Cr. Case No.97-II of 2003 dated 21.6.2007 was reversed. Precisely, the facts of the case are that the complainant party was constructing a house, over the land of the accused persons, (respondents herein) which they allegedly purchased from the ancestors of the respondents, but no document to this Whether the reporters of local newspapers are allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. effect was placed on record so much so the prosecution did not bother to produce in evidence, the revenue record of the disputed land. Therefore, in the absence of any revenue record and any document regarding the purchase of land as alleged, it cannot be said that the land in question was ever owned and possessed by the complainant party. Thus, the first appellate court rightly drew adverse inference and acquitted the respondents. The respondents were within their right to exercise right of private defence and they cannot be held guilty for the offences, punishable under sections 147, 427 and 323 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, leave to appeal is refused. November 3, 2008 (Surinder Singh),J. (D)