STATE OF H.P. Vs. SHYAM LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State is aggrieved by the judgment of learned Special Judge, Chamba acquitting the accused for offences under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). A number of submissions have been made by learned Additional Advocate General that the learned trial Court has not appreciated the evidence of the prosecution in accordance with the law laid down by the Supreme Court in C. Magesh and others vs. State of Karnataka, : (2010) 5 SCC 645.

(2.) BEFORE adverting this submission, what we find is that Ext. PW10/A the report of the Chemical Analyst states on microscopic examination cystolithic hair were found present, the Beam's Alkaline Test was positive and resin was found to be 31.11% and opined that the contraband substance contained the contents of charas. In Sun/7 Kumar vs. State of H.P. Latest, HLJ 2010 (HP) 207 which judgment has been constantly followed by this Court in many cases including Cr. Appeal No. 172 of 2006, titled State of H.P. vs. Ramesh Kumar, in which it is held by this Court that: -

(3.) After applying the verdict of Subhash Sharma (supra) in the present case we are of the considered view that in view of the observations in the report, indicated at Ext. PW7/C, the contraband goods recovered in the present case could also not be charas. As such, inter alia, on many other ground relied upon and considered by the learned Sessions Judge, Chamba to arrive at its findings the prosecution has failed to bring home the guilty to the accused beyond reasonable doubt. We are of the considered view that prosecution has failed to bring home the guilt to the accused. Accordingly, the criminal appeal, being devoid of any merit is dismissed. Bail bonds, furnished by the respondent, are hereby discharged.