The Himachal Pradesh High Court dismissed an appeal filed against the judgement of acquittal dated 01.01.2011 passed by the learned Special Judge. The Court observed that in an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court cannot substitute its view with the view taken by the learned trial court unless such view is illegal and perverse.
Brief Facts:
On 19.12.2009, the respondent was spotted dragging his punctured motorcycle on the road with a blue-colored bag tied to the carrier of the motorcycle. The bag tied to the carrier of the motorcycle was searched and two polythene packets were found inside the bag besides some clothes. On opening the packets, Charas in the shape of small sticks and round shapes were recovered. Thereafter, the tool bag of the motorcycle was also checked and another red colored packet was found therein, which also contained Charas. The recovered Charas was weighed. 3.00 Kg. of Charas was found in each of the packets recovered from the blue-colored bag and 2.00 Kg. Charas was found to be contained in a packet recovered from the tool bag of the motorcycle. The respondent was formally arrested. The respondent was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He did not choose to lead defense evidence. The respondent was acquitted by the learned trial Court vide impugned judgment.
The Court noted that the learned trial Court had doubted the prosecution story on the grounds firstly that the independent witnesses had not supported the prosecution case, secondly, the seal was not produced in the Court, lastly and most importantly had found serious gaps in the prosecution case such as non-recording of material entries in the Malkhana Register Ext. PW-4/A, there being no justifiable explanation as to the safe custody of contraband during the intervening night of 21/22.12.2009 and the sample having not been sent for chemical analysis, etc.
The Court observed that the evidence of hostile witnesses is not to be discarded as a whole. Since none of these independent witnesses have rendered any plausible explanation for signing the aforesaid documents, it can be presumed that they have signed it after going through the contents. The Court said that it has no hesitation to concur with the findings and the conclusions drawn by the learned trial Court regarding the doubts created in the prosecution story by the gaps found therein. It is settled that in an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court cannot substitute its view with the view taken by the learned trial court unless such view is illegal and perverse.
The decision of the Court:
The Himachal Pradesh High Court, dismissing the appeal, held that there is no ground to interfere with the impugned judgement.
Case Title: State of H.P. v Hoshiyar Singh
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Hon’ble Justice Satyen Vaidya
Case no.: Cr. Appeal No. 155 of 2011
Advocate for the Appellant: Mr. I. N. Mehta
Advocate for the Respondents: Mr. P. M. Negi
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
