JUDGMENT : Sanjay Karol, J. State has filed the present petition, under the provisions of Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking leave to appeal against the judgment dated 5.1.2015, passed by Special Judge, Kullu, Himachal Pradesh, in Sessions Trial No.18 of 2012, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh v. Hira Lal, whereby accused-respondent Hira Lal (hereinafter referred to as the accused), stands acquitted of the charge for having committed offence, punishable under the provisions of Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter after referred to as the Act). 2. In relation to FIR No.102, dated 18.6.2011 (Ex. PW- 7/A), registered at Police Station, Banjar (Seraj), District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh, under the provisions of Section 20 of the Act, accused Hira Lal was charged to face trial, for having committed offences, punishable under the provisions of Section 20 of the Act. 3. Briefly stated, case of the prosecution is that on 18.6.2011, around 3 p.m., when police party headed by HC Shes Raj (PW-11) and consisting of Constable Rohit Verma (PW-12) was on patrol duty and detection of cannabis plantation towards village Mashiar in Tehsil Banjar, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh, they noticed illegal cultivation of cannabis plants on a piece of land, which on enquiry from the Halqua Patwari was found to be on Khasra No.1481, which belonged to the accused and other co-sharers. Investigating Officer uprooted the cannabis plants and kept 30 plants as sample for examination in the Forensic Science Laboratory. Remaining plants were destroyed, as per the orders of the Deputy Superintendent of Police. On further investigation, it revealed that though Khasra No.1481 was recorded in joint ownership, but under family arrangement, it was given to the accused and he was in its exclusive possession. On the basis of Ruka (Ex.PW-11/B), FIR (Ex.PW-7/A) was registered by SHO Surender Pathak (PW-7), at Police Station, Banjar, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh. NCB form (Ex.PW-7/D) was also filled in triplicate. Special Report (Ex.PW-8/A) was also sent to the Office of Deputy Superintendent of Police, which was received in his office by HHC Nirat Singh (PW-8). Police also took into possession revenue record (Ex.PW-5/D) and PW-5/E). On completion of investigation, which, prima facie, revealed complicity of the accused in the alleged crime, challan was presented in the Court for trial. 4. Special Report (Ex.PW-8/A) was also sent to the Office of Deputy Superintendent of Police, which was received in his office by HHC Nirat Singh (PW-8). Police also took into possession revenue record (Ex.PW-5/D) and PW-5/E). On completion of investigation, which, prima facie, revealed complicity of the accused in the alleged crime, challan was presented in the Court for trial. 4. Based on the testimonies of witnesses and the material on record, trial Court acquitted the accused of the charged offence. Hence, the present petition for leave to appeal by the State. 5. Mr. V.S. Chauhan, learned Additional Advocate General, has taken us through the record of trial Court, including testimonies of the prosecution witnesses. 6. From the conjoint reading of testimony of the revenue and forest officials, it is quite apparent that the demarcation, so carried out on the spot by Sohan Lal (PW-10), Field Kanungo, is not in accordance with law. In fact, Sohan Lal and Patwari Man Singh (PW-5) admit that land comprising Khasra No. 1481, over which the alleged contraband substance was cultivated, was in joint ownership. That the accused alone was in possession thereof has not been proved by the prosecution and also by the co-sharers. Also, it has come in the evidence that no owner of the adjoining land and the co-sharer were associated during demarcation. 7. Hence, trial Court, in my considered view, rightly acquitted the accused. There is no error apparent on the face of record or illegality or perversity, resulting into miscarriage of justice, in the findings returned by the trial Court, warranting interference by this Court. As such, present petition for leave to appeal, being without any merit, is dismissed and disposed of.