JUDGMENT Bhawani Singh, J.—This appeal, by the State, is against the decision of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kangra, in Criminal case No. 152-111/ 1983. The learned trial Judge has acquitted the accused on 14-11-1985 for offence under section 61 (1) (c) of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914, as applicable to the State of Himachal Pradesh. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 23-4-1983, accused was found operating working stills at Ghurkari by Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, Shri Bansi Ram, accompanied by S/Shri Sali Ram and Prem Chand Constables, and Shri A. K. Dewan, Excise Inspector. The working stills were cooled down and the drum containing lahan, chappan, fitted with wires and one rubber pipe, one patila, being used as cooler, one bucket, one mug, one canee plastic and one bottle, being used as receiver, were taken into possession by the police, besides some pieces of firewood and dust. On test, by Shri A. K. Dewan, Excise Inspector, on the spot, lahan was found fit for illicit distillation. From the plastic canee and bottle, one nip each of 180 ml. was taken as sample. The Chemical Examiner, Karnal, declared the contents of nips as liquor. The investigation ended in the prosecution of the accused and ultimately the trial Judge ordered his acquittal. 3. Shri K. C. Rana, learned counsel appearing for the accused, made three submissions. I proceed to deal with them one after another. The first submission of Shri K. C. Rana relates to the finding of the trial Judge as to the deposit of the property in the malkhana, The perusal of the evidence on this aspect indicates that the deposit of the property in the mal khana has not been satisfactorily explained. There are material variations of the witnesses on this aspect of the case. It is important that the deposit and upkeep of the property in the malkhana is of fundamental importance. There has to be no indication from which it can be inferred that the property was tampered with during this time and this fact cannot be explained satisfactorily by the destination to which it ultimately goes for analysis. The finding of the trial Judge on this point is justified and I confirm the same. Same is my opinion on point No. 3 of the judgment which needs no further elaboration and discussion. 4. The finding of the trial Judge on this point is justified and I confirm the same. Same is my opinion on point No. 3 of the judgment which needs no further elaboration and discussion. 4. Lastly Shri K. C. Rana has contended that the investigation does not indicate reliability. No independent witnesses have been associated although they could have been made available easily as there are many houses at the place where the accused is alleged to have been caught. It is submitted by him that Shri Arvind Kumar Dewan (PW 1) is Excise Inspector, Shri Prem Chand (PW 2) and Shri Nain Sukh (PW 5) are Constables, Shri Rattan Singh (PW 3) is a peon in the Excise office and Shri Bansi Ram (PW 4) is the Police Officer making the investigation. Although it cannot be said that the investigation is bad due to the association of these official witnesses, however, it is necessary in such like cases to associate independent, disinterested and respectable witnesses so that the investigation evokes dependability. In this view of the matter, this contention has a force and on this account also, the accused is entitled to gain advantage. 5. Even otherwise, this being an appeal against acquittal, I am of the opinion that the view taken by the trial Judge is quite reasonable and no view can possibly be taken to interfere in the order of acquittal. 6. There is no merit in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismis sed. The personal bond and surety bond, if any, executed by the accused at any stage of the case are hereby cancelled. Appeal dismissed.