JUDGMENT : Rajiv Sharma, J. This appeal is instituted at the instance of the State against the judgment dated 25.9.2007, rendered by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class (4), Shimla, H.P. in Criminal Case No. RBT 50/2 of 05/-01, whereby the respondent-accused (hereinafter referred to as accused), who were charged with and tried for offences punishable under Sections 336 and 304-A IPC has been acquitted. 2. The case of the prosecution, in a nut shell, is that on 24.3.2000 at about 1:45 AM, in the night, Suresh Kumar telephonically informed the Police Station that dead body of Puran Chand was lying in Ghayal jungle, Kanechi. SI Gian Chand along with HC Prithi Singh went to the spot. SI Gian Chand recorded the statement of complainant Satya Dev under Section 154 Cr.P.C. vide Ext. PW-2/A. The complainant Satya Dev disclosed that on 23.3.2000 at about 6:00 PM, he along with Jagdish Chand and his brother Puran Chand went to jungle for hunting. Accused Jagdish Chand was carrying a gun. Jagdish Chand concealed himself in the jungle and sent his brother along with him in the jungle for making the chicken to fly. At about 7:15 PM, he heard the noise of two gunshots. He ran towards the accused Jagdish Chand. He saw that the accused was cleaning the chicken and he also had fired from there. He thereafter heard the noise of his brother and they went towards the noise and saw that his brother Puran Chand was lying on the ground. His clothes were stained with blood. When he asked his brother Puran Chand, his brother disclosed that he was hit by a bullet. In the mean time, his brother collapsed. He along with Jagdish Chand saw that bullet had struck on the chest of his brother. He thereafter, along with Jagdish went to the village. They returned back with his father, Suresh Kumar, Karam Chand and other people from the village. Jagdish had kept his gun in the house. Satya Dev further stated that Jagdish had killed his brother by firing negligently. FIR Ext. PW-11/A was registered. The clothes of the deceased were taken into possession. The blood stained leaves were also taken into possession. On 25.3.2000, wife of the accused Meera Devi produced gun Ext. P-2 before the police vide memo Ext. PW-3/A. On 30.3.2000, accused Jagdish Chand produced his licence Ext. FIR Ext. PW-11/A was registered. The clothes of the deceased were taken into possession. The blood stained leaves were also taken into possession. On 25.3.2000, wife of the accused Meera Devi produced gun Ext. P-2 before the police vide memo Ext. PW-3/A. On 30.3.2000, accused Jagdish Chand produced his licence Ext. P-1 before the police vide memo Ext. PW-1/A. The post mortem was got conducted. The clothes of the deceased were sent for chemical examination. The chemical examination report is Ext. PW-13/A. The gun Ext. P-2 along with pellets recovered from the body of the deceased were also sent to FSL, Junga for forensic examination. The report is Ext. PW-7/A. The statements of the witnesses were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The investigation was completed and challan was put up before the Court, after completing all the codal formalities. 3. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, has examined as many as sixteen witnesses. The accused was also examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He denied the case of the prosecution. The learned trial Court acquitted the accused, as noticed hereinabove. Hence, this appeal. 4. Mr. Parmod Thakur, Addl. Advocate General, appearing on behalf of the State, has vehemently argued that the prosecution has proved the case against the accused persons. On the other hand, Mr. B.C.Verma, Advocate has supported the judgment of the trial Court dated 25.9.2007. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for both the sides and have also gone through the judgment and records of the case carefully. 6. Amar Singh, PW-1 testified that he was an agriculturist by profession. On 30.3.2000, the accused had produced before the police his gun licence. He did not remember the number. It was taken into possession vide memo Ext. PW-1/A. 7. Satya Dev, PW-2 is the material witness. He testified that on 23.3.2000, he along with accused Jagdish Chand and his brother Puran Chand went to Kanechi jungle for hunting. Jagdish Chand was carrying a gun. He sent his brother in the jungle at 7:15 PM to make the chicken fly. He and his brother Puran Chand went in different directions to make the chicken fly. After some time, he heard the noise of fire and the cries of his brother. They went towards the cries and saw his brother lying on the ground stained with blood. He and his brother Puran Chand went in different directions to make the chicken fly. After some time, he heard the noise of fire and the cries of his brother. They went towards the cries and saw his brother lying on the ground stained with blood. His brother disclosed that he was struck in the chest by bullet and his brother stopped talking after some time. Thereafter, he along with Jagdish returned to village and brought Puran Chand to the Police Station who was found dead. The police recorded his statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C. vide Ext. PW-2/A. The bullet was fired by the accused. In his cross-examination, he admitted that they were at a distance of half a kilometer from each other. They were at three different places. He heard two gun shots. He also admitted that other people also go for hunting in the jungle. He also admitted categorically that the accused had not fired in his presence. He further admitted in his crossexamination that when his brother cried, he and Jagdish went to see his brother together. 8. Meera Devi, PW-3 deposed that she has handed over to the Police SBML gun vide memo Ext. PW-3/A. 9. Parmod Kumar, PW-4 has also signed memo Ext. PW-3/A. 10. Kapil Dev, PW-5 testified that Puran Chand was residing in their village whereas Jagdish was resident of another village. Puran Chand was a labourer. Puran Chand and Jagdish had good relations with each other. Jagdish possessed a licence of gun. Suresh told him on 24th that his brother was hit by bullet. It was about 9-10. He showed his ignorance regarding the fact as to whose bullet had hit Puran Chand. He did not know that Puran Chand and others had gone to the jungle. The police has prepared spot map vide Mark-A. In his cross-examination, he deposed categorically that Suresh has not told him that Puran Chand was hit by bullet from the gun of Jagdish. 11. Dr. V.K.Mishra, PW-6 has conducted the post mortem examination. The report is Ext. PW-6/A. The margin wound of entry 4 cm in diameter was present on the right side of chest near the sterno clavicular joint. He noticed black coloured skin over the wound. There was evidence of tattooing. But, he found no wound on exit or posterior chest wall. Dr. V.K.Mishra, PW-6 has conducted the post mortem examination. The report is Ext. PW-6/A. The margin wound of entry 4 cm in diameter was present on the right side of chest near the sterno clavicular joint. He noticed black coloured skin over the wound. There was evidence of tattooing. But, he found no wound on exit or posterior chest wall. According to him, gun was fired from a close range and burning evidence was also present. 12. Rajesh Kumar, PW-7 has proved report Ext. PW-7/A. According to him, the gun was fired recently. However, in his cross-examination, he admitted that it cannot be said as to how many days before the gun was used. 13. Suresh Dutt, PW-8 is the brother of the deceased. According to him, on 23.3.2000, deceased Puran Chand along with Satya Dev and Jagdish had gone for hunting in jungle. In his examination-in-chief, he has admitted that his brother Puran Chand and accused were very good friends. His brother was hit by the bullet, however, he did not know how he was hit. He was declared hostile and cross-examined by the learned APP. In his cross-examination by the learned APP, he denied the suggestion that the accused had fired two shots. 14. Ram Krishan, PW-9 testified that the accused was having his licensed gun. The police had called him at 8:30-9:00. He was not told by anybody as to how deceased died. The case property was taken into possession vide Ext. PW-5/A. He was also declared hostile and crossexamined by the learned APP. In his cross-examination by the learned APP, he denied that the accused had fired negligently resulting in the death of Puran Chand. 15. Suresh Dutt, PW-12 deposed that he was working as T-Mate in HPSEB. He did not know anything about the case. He was declared hostile and cross-examined by the learned APP. In his cross-examination by the learned APP, he deposed that he did not know who has fired at Puran Chand. The accused was not present on the spot. 16. Arun Kumar, PW-13 has proved chemical examination report Ext. PW-13/A. As per the report, human blood was found on the jacket, sweater, shirt, vest, underwear, pants and also on the leaves collected from the spot. 17. PW-16 SI Gian Chand has investigated the matter. He clicked the photographs. The accused was not present on the spot. 16. Arun Kumar, PW-13 has proved chemical examination report Ext. PW-13/A. As per the report, human blood was found on the jacket, sweater, shirt, vest, underwear, pants and also on the leaves collected from the spot. 17. PW-16 SI Gian Chand has investigated the matter. He clicked the photographs. He took into possession wings, ash, blood stained leaves and shoes of the deceased from the spot. He got the post mortem conducted. He also recorded the statements of the witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. 18. The deceased has died as per report Ext. PW-6/A, due to hemorrhagic shock secondary to injury to vital organ. In his statement recorded under Section 154 Cr.P.C., PW-2 Satya Dev has deposed that he heard noise of two gun shots. He came to the place where the accused was present. The accused was removing the feathers from the chicken. He heard cries of his brother. Thereafter, both of them went down. His brother was lying on the ground. His clothes were smeared with blood. Further, in his examination-in-chief, Satya Dev, PW-2 deposed that accused had sent him and his brother Puran Chand in different directions to make the chicken fly. After some time, he heard the noise of gunshot and the cries of his brother. Thereafter, they went in the direction from where cries were heard. His brother had collapsed. His brother disclosed that he was struck in the chest by bullet. In his statement recorded under Section 154 Cr.P.C., he has stated that he heard the noise of gunshot. He first approached Jagdish and found him cleaning feathers of chicken. Thereafter, he heard the cries of his brother and both of them went towards the cries. However, PW-2, as noticed hereinabove, deposed that he heard the noise and went to see his brother. In his cross-examination, he categorically admitted that all of them were standing at a distance of half a kilometer from each other. He also admitted that there were other hunters in the jungle. The accused has not fired in his presence. 19. Dr. V.K.Mishra, PW-6 has noticed that there were burn injuries on the entry point which suggests that the bullet was fired from very close range, though, PW-2 Satya Dev deposed that they were at a distance of half a kilometer from each other at that time. The accused has not fired in his presence. 19. Dr. V.K.Mishra, PW-6 has noticed that there were burn injuries on the entry point which suggests that the bullet was fired from very close range, though, PW-2 Satya Dev deposed that they were at a distance of half a kilometer from each other at that time. Since all of them were at a distance of half a kilometer from each other, there was no possibility of the deceased being fired by accused from a close range. Moreover, according to the medical evidence, there was burning evidence near the wound suggesting that it was fired from a short range. 20. The prosecution has failed to prove that it was the accused who has fired gunshot on the person of deceased and the deceased died due to rash and negligent act of the accused with the gun. Thus, there is no occasion for this Court to interfere with the well reasoned judgment of the learned trial Court dated 25.9.2007. 21. Accordingly, there is no merit in this appeal and the same is dismissed.