IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr. Appeal No.: 181 of 2001. Reserved on: 04.01.2008. Decided on: 10.01.2008. State of Himachal Pradesh. … … Appellant. Versus Rakesh Kumar & Others. … … Accused/Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Appellant: Mr. M.A. Khan and Ms. Meenakshi Sharma, Deputy Advocate Generals. For the Accused/Respondents: Mr. Romesh Verma, Advocate. Rajiv Sharma, Judge: The respondents were prosecuted in Criminal case No.260-2 of 1999/1997 under Sections 147, 341, 323 and 506 of I.P.C. in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Shimla and were acquitted on 30.11.2000. The present appeal has been preferred by the State against the judgment of acquittal dated 30.11.2000. The facts as gathered from the judgment of the trial Court are that on 29.8.1997 complainant Hem Raj alongwith Goverdhan Singh were beaten up by the respondents. It is alleged that the persons who have beaten them were Naresh Kumar, Pinku-I, Pinku-II and Banti and their colleagues, but he did not know their names. They were saved by Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - Sumer Singh and Sunder Singh. Consequently, the matter was reported to the police and the FIR Ex.PW-1/B was registered. The matter was investigated and on completion of the investigation, the challan was put- up in the Court. The prosecution had examined as many as five witnesses. The accused-respondents were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The trial Court acquitted the accused-respondents on 30.11.2000. Hence, the present appeal. The learned Deputy Advocate General had strenuously argued that the prosecution had proved the case against the accused. Shri Romesh Verma had supported the judgment dated 30.11.2000. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. PW-1 Hem Raj, complainant and PW-2 Goverdhan belong to the same village, i.e. Rampur. PW-3 Sumer Singh also belongs to village Rampur. PW-1 Hem Raj and PW-2 Shri Goverdhan have categorically stated that about 40-50 persons were present at the spot when they were given beatings by the respondents on 29.8.1997. It has also come in the evidence that where the incident took place, there are shops. The prosecution had not produced any shop-keeper as a witness. The prosecution has also failed to produce Shri Sumer Singh, who according to PW-1 Shri Hem Raj and PW-2 Shri Goverdhan had saved them. The incident is dated 29th August, 1997, but the FIR was registered on 30th August, 1997. This delay has not been explained by the prosecution. The statement of PW-3 cannot be relied upon since he and the complainant belong to the same village. The prosecution has not cited any independent witness out of the persons who were present on the spot. - 3 - The prosecution has failed to prove the case against the respondents and the respondents have rightly been acquitted by the trial Court. Consequently, there is no merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed. The bail bonds furnished by the accused-respondents stand discharged. January 10, 2008. (Rajiv Sharma), (sck) Judge.