JUDGMENT Sureshwar Thakur, J. - The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, upon, criminal case No. 24/3 of 1997, made a verdict of conviction, upon, the accused/respondents herein, qua the charge drawn under Section 3 of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966, and, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned, also proceeded to impose consequent therewith sentences of imprisonment and of fine, upon, the accused. 2. The convicts/accused becoming aggrieved, proceeded to prefer Criminal Appeal No. 49-S/10 of 08/04, before the learned First Appellate Court, and, the latter thereon made a verdict of acquittal. 3. The state of Himachal Pradesh becomes aggrieved, and, has proceed to strive, to, annul the verdict of acquittal recorded by the learned First Appellate Court, through its casting extant appeal before this Court. 4. Primarily, the prosecution was under a legal duty to establish the charge drawn against the accused, through its adducing evidence, hence personifying that the purportedly stolen property was owned by Railways. 5. The prosecution would be concluded to adduce cogent evidence, in respect of the apposite charge drawn against the accused, only upon its witnesses testifying before the learned trial court, that the seals of English alphabet SS , as made, upon the case property, were, in fact made thereon. For determining the afore factum, it is important to allude to the testimony of ASI Swarup Singh. In his testification, he has not echoed that the railway weight(s) recovered from all the accused were/was in fact sealed, with, seals carrying the afore English alphabets. However, PW-2 has testified that the case property was sealed with seal impressions of English Alphabet SS . The afore inter se contradictions inter se the testification of ASI Swarup Singh, and, PW-2 with respect to the respective embossings, and, non embossings of seal impressions carrying English Alphabet SS hence on the case property, recovered through memo Ex.PW1/A, makes deep in-rodes into the veracity of the prosecution case. Therefore, the prosecution has been unable to adduce cogent evidence that the seal impression(s) of English alphabet SS , became embossed upon the case property, hence, recovered through the apposite recovery memo(s). 6. Furthermore, PW-10 Chander Vir Bhandari, to whom the seized case property was shown, has, stated that four open weights were produced before him rather having card label, and, that one weight was found in a sealed condition, in a plastic bag. 6. Furthermore, PW-10 Chander Vir Bhandari, to whom the seized case property was shown, has, stated that four open weights were produced before him rather having card label, and, that one weight was found in a sealed condition, in a plastic bag. Necessarily, he has omitted to bespeak with specificity with respect to the embossings of seal(s) on the seized/recovered case property, carrying thereon seal impression(s) of English alphabet SS . His omitting to state the afore conspicuous incriminatory factum, does not constrain, this Court to conclude, that the seized/recovered case property hence recovered through the relevant recovery memos, becoming sealed with seals carrying thereon English alphabet SS . Therefore, since the making(s) or embossings of seal impressions of English Alphabet SS , upon, the case property, was enjoined to be cogently proven, by the prosecution rather for sustaining the charge, whereas, the afore prima donna factum probandum remaining unproven, hence, this Court is constrained to dismiss the extant appeal. 7. Be that as it may, the prosecution was also under a legal duty to produce the best documentary evidence, comprised in the relevant inventory maintained in the office of Railways, and, its displaying, that the purportedly stolen/recovered property, despite being reflected therein, and, also despite its not being validly retrieved therefrom, it hence becoming stolen from the godown or from the rail tracks by the accused concerned. However, the afore best documentary evidence remained unadduced by the prosecution, thereupon, also the prosecution has completely failed to prove to the hilt the charge drawn against the accused. 8. For the reasons which have been recorded hereinabove, this Court holds that the learned Sessions Judge concerned, has appraised the entire evidence, on record, in a wholesome and harmonious manner, apart therefrom, the analysis of the material, on record, by the learned Sessions Judge concerned, , hence, also not suffering from any gross perversity or absurdity of mis-appreciation, and, non appreciation of germane thereto evidence, on record. 9. Consequently, there is no merit in the extant appeal, and, it is dismissed accordingly. The judgment impugned before this Court is affirmed. All pending applications also stand disposed of. Records be sent back forthwith.