IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 77 of 1994 Decided on: January 7, 2008 State of H.P. …Appellant Versus Krishnu Ram and another …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the appellant : Mr. Som Dutt Vasudeva, Additional Advocate General with Mr. D.S. Nainta, Dy. Advocate General. For the respondents : Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate vice Mr. Ashwani Pathak, Advocate. Surjit Singh, Judge (oral) This appeal by the State is directed against the judgment of the trial Magistrate, whereby the respondents have been acquitted of the charge, under Sections 457 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code, for which they were tried on police report. 2. PW-1 Jamna Devi had her cattle shed away from her residence. On 10.8.1992, she locked her cattle shed with a buffalo, a lamb and some other cattle inside it and went to her house. Next day when she went to the cattle shed, it was found that the lock had been broken. She found the lamb missing. She searched for her lamb. On 13.8.1992, she came to know that some Bengalis (nomads) camping in a Dwar (cave) near the village had a skin of lamb with them. She accompanied by PW-3 Ram Dass, Pardhan of the Panchayat and also a Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… Ward Member Nand Lal went to the cave of the respondents. Skin of a lamb was found there which PW-1 Jamna Devi identified to be of her lamb. 3. Matter was reported to the police. Police visited the spot and took into possession the skin of the lamb and the broken lock and Kunda etc. Respondents were interrogated. Respondent Krishnu Ram made a disclosure statement leading to the discovery of a knife, which he allegedly used to remove the skin of the lamb. 4. Trial Court acquitted the respondents holding that it was not established beyond reasonable doubt that the skin allegedly recovered from the cave of the respondents was that of the lamb of PW-1 Jamna Devi. 5. We have perused the record and heard the learned Additional Advocate General. 6. A reading of the testimony of PW-1 Jamna Devi shows that she did not point out any mark of distinction for the identification of the skin. She only stated that her lamb was white in colour and the skin was also white. It is a matter of common knowledge that majority of the sheep in this part of the country are white in colour. Therefore, identification of a sheep by the colour of its skin alone cannot be said to be identification beyond reasonable doubt. 7. For the foregoing reason, we see no merit in the appeal. The same is, therefore, dismissed. ( Surjit Singh ), J January 7, 2008(ss) ( Surinder Singh ), J