STATE Vs. SRI CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent Shri Chand alias Lalla was prosecuted and convicted of the offence under Section 3 of Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, by judg ment and order dated 3. 7. 86 delivered by Judicial Magistrate (Railway), Banda, in Case No. 425 of 1979. THE respondent pre ferred an appeal (Criminal Appeal No. 50 of 1986) which was allowed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Banda, on 1. 9. 86. THE State has applied for leave to appeal against the said order.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the state and have also gone through the judgment of the appellate court. A dynamo belt is said to have been recovered from the posses sion of the respondent. His arrest was con sidered by the Sessions Judge and he has doubted the same after considering the evidence of Sunder Lal, P. W. 3, and Ram Khilawan Shukla, P. W. 6. The manner of arrest itself being doubtful the question of recovery would follow and it would also become doubtful. A dynamo belt is a very common property and it is also not a valuable property. In such circumstances the possibility of its planta tion cannot be ruled out. The learned Sessions Judge was, therefore, perfectly justified in discarding the story of the prosecution and recording acquittal of the respondent. There is, therefore, no occasion to grant leave to appeal. The application for leave to appeal is rejected and the memo of appeal filed along with it is also dismissed. Appeal Rejected. .