STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. RAJAN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent was tried, chargesheeted and acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. The State felt aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal, hence the present appeal.

(2.) Shri Virender Kumar Verma, learned Additional Advocate General vehemently argued that the learned trial Court had taken a wrong view discarding the cogent and reliable evidence of the prosecution. If it is scrutinized cautiously, it is likely to be reversed.

(3.) On the other hand, Shri Naveen K. Bhardwaj, learned Counsel for the respondent has supported the impugned judgment of acquittal and ventilated that the prosecution has failed to prove that the police party was on patrolling duty and further that the rim in question belonged to HRTC, which is alleged to have been removed from the workshop. It is also submitted that the brake-drum in question was not having any identification mark entered in the stock register nor there is anything to show that any physical verification was ever made after the said incident by some responsible officer of the HRTC with respect to the missing of brake-drum.