Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 521 (HP)

Bhupinder Singh v. State Of H P

2021-08-06

SURESHWAR THAKUR

body2021
JUDGMENT Sureshwar Thakur, J. - The accused Bhupinder Singh, Piare Lal, Vijay Kumar, Amarjeet Singh, and, accused Kaptan Singh, faced trial for charges drawn against them under 397, 342 of the IPC, and, under Section 25 of the Arms Act. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Una, upon, Sessions Case No.14/08, as arose from FIR No. 475 of 2003 of 31.07.2007, lodged at Police Station Una, proceeded to make a verdict of acquittal in favour of the accused. The State of Himachal Pradesh is not aggrieved from the afore made verdict of acquittal by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge concerned, and, obviously, the afore made verdict of acquittal acquires conclusive and binding effect. 2. In the operative part of the verdict, drawn by the learned Additional Sessions Judge concerned, he had also ordered that the air pistol, Ex. P-1, Kirpan, Ex.P-2 be destroyed, and, had further ordered that currency notes valuing Rs.50,000/-, and, recovered through Ex.PW10/C, be confiscated to the State of H.P. The appellant Bhupinder Singh is aggrieved, from the afore made order, appertaining to the confiscation of currency notes, valuing Rs.50,000/-, and, recovered through Ex.PW10/C, to the State of H.P. He claims that the afore made order is legally infirm. Obviously, he claims that it be quashed and set aside, and, this Court proceed to release the afore sum in his favour, as, he is the lawful owner thereof. 3. The learned trial Court in its conclusive, and, binding verdict made, upon, Sessions Case No. 14/08, on 29.7.2009, had concluded that there was no evidence existing on record, that the currency recovered through Ex.PW10/C, and, carrying a value of Rs.50,000/-, became looted from the bank by the accused. Therefore, the learned trial Court had made an order of acquittal upon all the accused. 4. Even though, the verdict of acquittal pronounced by the learned Additional Sessions Judge concerned, upon, Sessions Case No. 14/08, has acquired conclusive, and, binding effect, and, hence, estops the learned Additional Advocate General to resist the petitioner's claim to seek the quashing of the afore made order, appertaining to the confiscation of the currency notes, valuing Rs.50,000/- to the State of H.P., and, for consequential release of the afore amount to the appellant Bhupinder Singh. However, this Court may permit the learned Additional Advocate General, to argue the extant appeal, only on the ground that the extant appeal is bad for non joinder of necessary parties, and, that there is evidence existing on record rather suggestive that co-accused along with the appellant herein, rather jointly owning currency notes valuing Rs.50,000/-, whereas, only upon theirs being joined in the array of respondents, they would come forward to also stake a claim, for the currency notes being proportionately disbursed amongst them. 5. The afore made submission before this Court, by the learned Additional Advocate General would hold vigour, only in the event of co-accused other than the appellant, in their respectively drawn statements under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., making alike, the appellant herein, a claim for currency notes valuing Rs.50,000/-, being owned by them too. However, a reading of the statements (supra) of all the co-accused, makes it clear, that excepting appellant Bhupinder Singh, the other co-accused, did not, in their respectively drawn statement under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., stake any claim that currency notes, valuing Rs.50,000/- being owned by them. Therefore, for want of voicings by co-accused other than the appellant Bhupinder Singh, in their respectively drawn statements under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., completely estops them to lay any claim for the afore currency notes, being released to them, nor the learned Additional Advocate General, for theirs being not joined as co-respondents, in the extant appeal, can contend that the extant appeal is misconstituted. 6. Be that as it may, hence for want of failure of the State of Himachal Pradesh, to challenge the verdict of acquittal made upon, Sessions Case No. 14/08, it has acquired conclusive and binding effect, and, hence all the findings recorded therein, inclusive of currency notes, being not cogently proven by the prosecution, to be looted from the bank by the accused also acquire apt conclusive, and, binding effect. Therefore, the State of Himachal Pradesh cannot lay any valid claim, with respect to the currency notes, valuing Rs.50,000/-, and, contrarily, the appellant Bhupinder Singh, who staked a claim for the currency notes, valuing Rs.50,000/- being released in his favour, the latter being the lawful owner thereof, does hold a valid right, for, release thereof in his favour. 7. Therefore, the State of Himachal Pradesh cannot lay any valid claim, with respect to the currency notes, valuing Rs.50,000/-, and, contrarily, the appellant Bhupinder Singh, who staked a claim for the currency notes, valuing Rs.50,000/- being released in his favour, the latter being the lawful owner thereof, does hold a valid right, for, release thereof in his favour. 7. As a corollary, the impugned verdict made by the learned Additional Sessions Judge concerned, only with respect to his ordering confiscation of currency notes, valuing Rs.50,000/- is interfered with and, is quashed and set aside. Moreover, it is ordered that the currency notes, valuing Rs.50,000/- be released to the appellant Bhupinder Singh. 8. Consequently, with the afore observations the extant appeal stands disposed of. All pending applications also stand disposed of. Records be sent back forthwith.