Himachal Pradesh High Court
Reserved On: 05.09.2025 vs Satnam Singh & Others on 22 September, 2025
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur, Sushil Kukreja
1 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 258 of 2017 Reserved on: 05.09.2025 Decided on: 22.09.2025 .
_____________________________________________________ State of Himachal Pradesh .....Appellant.
Versus Satnam Singh & others ......Respondent.
_____________________________________________________ Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge.
1Whether approved for reporting?
_____________________________________________________ For the appellant: Mr. Yashwardhan Chauhan, Senior r Additional Advocate General.
For respondent No. 1: Mr. Vinod Thakur, Advocate, as Legal Aid Counsel.
For respondents No. 2 to 4: Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Suri, Advocate.
Sushil Kukreja, Judge.
The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against judgment, dated 27.12.2016, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (II), Una, District Una, H.P., in Sessions Case No. 54 of 2014, whereby the accused persons (respondents herein) were acquitted under Sections 304, 201 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short "IPC") and Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS2 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) "NDPS Act").
2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal, as per the prosecution story, can be summarized as under:
.
2(a). On 23.05.2014 complainant Shri Pargat Singh got recorded his statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C., wherein he stated that his son Arju Rana (since deceased) was working on daily wage basis in UCO Bank, Dulehar and he used to come to the house daily. He further stated that the deceased did not have any bad habit of consuming any intoxicating drugs etc., but 5-6 months back he fell sick and became weak.
r The complainant further stated that his uncle treated the deceased by administering injections of glucose and strength. On 21.05.2014 complainant's daughter Shashi Bala, who was married locally, came to their house and the complainant sent the deceased for bringing some fruits. When the deceased did not return home after an hour, Shashi Bala inquired from deceased's friend Navdeep @ Laddi about the deceased, who told her that he saw the deceased in the company of Sunny and Baba (accused persons), who were sons of Satnam Singh @ Satto (another accused) of village Heeran Thara towards their house. As per the complainant, thereafter he alongwith Shashi Bala and Munish Rana searched the deceased and reached the house of accused Satnam Singh, where they ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS
3 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) found accused persons Baba and Sunny pouring water over the head of the deceased. On being inquired by the complainant, as to what had happened, they asked him to take the deceased to .
Raja Hospital, Nawanshehar. On being again inquired as to how the deceased had become unconscious and what was given by them to him to eat, they told that the deceased was given an injection of heroin. Thereafter, the complainant took the deceased to CHC Haroli and subsequently to RH, Una, where the deceased had died. The complainant stated that the accused persons Sunny and Baba knew that after giving heroin injection, the deceased could die, but despite that they gave injection of heroin to the deceased with intention to cause his death. Police got conducted the postmortem on the corpse of the deceased and during the course of the investigation, scientific samples were collected. As per the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory Dharamshala, there was presence of morphine in the parts of heart and lungs and blood. Initially the investigation was carried-out by the police of Police Station, Haroli, and later on the case was transferred for investigation to CID. After conclusion of the investigation, it was unearthed that there was involvement of accused Satnam Singh and Bhupinder Kaur. After completion of the investigation, police presented the charge-sheet before the learned Trial Court.
::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS4 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB )
3. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined nineteen witnesses. Statement of the accused persons, under Section 313 Cr.P.C., was recorded, wherein they pleaded not guilty .
and claimed trial.
4. The learned Trial Court, vide impugned judgment dated 27.12.2016 acquitted all the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 304, 201 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 21 of the NDPS Act, hence the instant appeal preferred by the appellant/State.
5. to The learned Senior Additional Advocate General for the appellant/State contended that the impugned judgment is against the law and facts, based upon surmises and conjectures, thus liable to set-aside. He further contended that the learned Trial Court has failed to appreciate the evidence in its right and true perspective, as such the impugned judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court deserves to be quashed and set-aside by allowing the instant appeal.
6. Conversely, Legal Aid Counsel for accused/respondent No. 1 and learned counsel for accused persons/respondents No..
2 to 4 contended that the judgment passed by the learned Trial Court is the result of proper appreciation of the material on record and the same was passed after appreciating the evidence and law ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 5 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) in its right and true perspective. They further contended that the learned Trial Court has passed a well reasoned judgment, which does not require any interference, thus the instant appeal, which is .
devoid of any merit, be dismissed.
7. We have heard the learned Senior Additional Advocate General for the appellant/State, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the accused/respondent No. 1, learned counsel for accused/respondents No. 2 to 4 and carefully examined the entire records.
8. to It is well settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in a catena of decisions that an Appellate Court has full power to review, re-
appreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded. However, Appellate Court must bear in mind that in case of acquittal there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent Court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial Court.
Further, if two reasonable views are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the Appellate Court should not disturb the ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 6 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) finding of acquittal recorded by the trial Court.
9. The scope of power of Appellate Court in case of appeal against acquittal has been dealt with by the Hon'ble Apex .
Court in Muralidhar alias Gidda & another Vs. State of Karnataka reported in (2014) 5 SCC 730, which reads as under:
"10. Lord Russell in Sheo Swarup[1], highlighted the approach of the High Court as an appellate court hearing the appeal against acquittal. Lord Russell said, "... the High Court should and will always give proper weight and consideration to such matters as (1) the views of the trial Judge as to the credibility of the witnesses; (2) the presumption of innocence in favour of the r accused, a presumption certainly not weakened by the fact that he has been acquitted at his trial; (3) the right of the accused to the benefit of any doubt; and (4) the slowness of an appellate court in disturbing a finding of fact arrived at by a Judge who had the advantage of seeing the witnesses."
The opinion of the Lord Russell has been followed over the years.
11. As early as in 1952, this Court in Surajpal Singh[2] while dealing with the powers of the High Court in an appeal against acquittal under Section 417 of the Criminal Procedure Code observed:
"7...........the High Court has full power to review the evidence upon which the order of acquittal was founded, but it is equally well settled that the presumption of innocence of the accused is further reinforced by his acquittal by the trial court, and the findings of the trial court which had the advantage of seeing the witnesses and hearing their evidence can be reversed only for very substantial and compelling reasons."
12. The approach of the appellate court in the appeal against acquittal has been dealt with by this Court ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 7 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) in Tulsiram Kanu [3], Madan Mohan Singh [4], Atley [5] , Aher Raja Khima [6], Balbir Singh [7], M.G. Agarwal [8], Noor Khan [9], Khedu Mohton [10], Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade [11], Lekha Yadav [12], Khem Karan [13], Bishan Singh [14], Umedbhai Jadavbhai [15], K. Gopal Reddy [16], Tota Singh .
[17], Ram Kumar [18], Madan Lal [19], Sambasivan [20], Bhagwan Singh [21], Harijana Thirupala [22], C. Antony [23], K. Gopalakrishna [24], Sanjay Thakran [25] and Chandrappa [26]. It is not necessary to deal with these cases individually.
Suffice it to say that this Court has consistently held that in dealing with appeals against acquittal, the appellate court must bear in mind the following:
(i) There is presumption of innocence in favour of an accused person and such presumption is strengthened by the order of acquittal passed in his favour by the trial court;
(ii) The accused person is entitled to the benefit of reasonable doubt when it deals with the r merit of the appeal against acquittal;
(iii) Though, the power of the appellate court in considering the appeals against acquittal are as extensive as its powers in appeals against convictions but the appellate court is generally loath in disturbing the finding of fact recorded by the trial court. It is so because the trial court had an advantage of seeing the demeanor of the witnesses. If the trial court takes a reasonable view of the facts of the case, interference by the appellate court with the judgment of acquittal is not justified.
Unless, the conclusions reached by the trial court are palpably wrong or based on erroneous view of the law or if such conclusions are allowed to stand, they are likely to result in grave injustice, the reluctance on the part of the appellate court in interfering with such conclusions is fully justified; and
(iv) Merely because the appellate court on re-
appreciation and re-evaluation of the evidence is inclined to take a different view, interference with the judgment of acquittal is not justified if the view taken by the trial court is a possible view. The evenly balanced views of the evidence must not result in the ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 8 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) interference by the appellate court in the judgment of the trial court."
10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajesh Prasad vs. State of Bihar & another, (2022) 3 SCC 471, observed as under:
.
"31. The circumstances under which an appeal would be entertained by this Court from an order of acquittal passed by a High Court may be summarized as follows:
31.1. Ordinarily, this Court is cautious in interfering with an order of acquittal, especially when the order of acquittal has been confirmed up to the High Court. It is only in rarest of rare cases, where the High Court, on an absolutely wrong process of reasoning and a legally erroneous and perverse approach to the facts of the case, ignoring some of the most vital facts, has acquitted the accused, that the same may be r reversed by this Court, exercising jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution. [State of U.P. v. Sahai (1982) 1 SCC 352] Such fetters on the right to entertain an appeal are prompted by the reluctance to expose a person, who has been acquitted by a competent court of a criminal charge, to the anxiety and tension of a further examination of the case, even though it is held by a superior court. [Arunchalam v. P.S.R. Sadhanantham (1979) 2 SCC 297] An appeal cannot be entertained against an order of acquittal which has, after recording valid and weighty reasons, has arrived at an unassailable, logical conclusion which justifies acquittal. [State of Haryana vs. Lakhbir] 31.2. However, this Court has on certain occasions, set aside the order of acquittal passed by a High Court. The circumstances under which this Court may entertain an appeal against an order of acquittal and pass an order of conviction, may be summarized as follows:
31.2.1. Where the approach or reasoning of the High Court is perverse;
(a) Where incontrovertible evidence has been rejected by the High Court based on suspicion and surmises, which are rather ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 9 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) unrealistic. [State of Rajasthan v. Sukhpal Singh (1983) 1 SCC 393] For example, where direct, unanimous accounts of the eyewitnesses, were discounted without cogent reasoning. [State of U.P. vs. Shanker 1980 Supp SCC 489] .
(b) Where the intrinsic merits of the testimony of relatives, living in the same house as the prosecutrix, were discounted on the ground that they were "interested"
witnesses. [State of U.P. v. Hakim Singh (1980)
(c) Where testimony of witnesses had been disbelieved by the High Court, on an unrealistic conjecture of personal motive on the part of witnesses to implicate the accused, when in fact, the witnesses had no axe to grind in the said matter. [State of Rajasthan v. Sukhpal Singh (1983) 1 SCC 393]
(d) Where dying declaration of the deceased prosecutrix was rejected by the High Court on an irrelevant ground that they did not explain the injury found on one of the persons present at the site of occurrence of the crime. [Arunachalam vs. P.S.R. Sadhanantham (1979) 2 SCC 297]
(e) Where the High Court applied an unrealistic standard of "implicit proof" rather than that of "proof beyond reasonable doubt" and therefore evaluated the evidence in a flawed manner. [State of U.P. v. Ranjha Ram (1986) 4 SCC 99]
(f) Where the High Court rejected circumstantial evidence, based on an exaggerated and capricious theory, which were beyond the plea of the accused;
[State of Maharashtra v. Champalal Punjaji Shah (1981) 3 SCC 610]
(g) Where the High Court acquitted the accused on the ground that he had no adequate motive to commit the offence, although, in the said case, there was strong direct evidence establishing the guilt of the accused, thereby making it ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 10 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) necessary on the part of the prosecution to establish "motive". [State of A.P. v. Bogam Chandraiah (1990) 1 SCC 445] 31.2.2.Where acquittal would result is gross miscarriage of justice;
.
(a) Where the findings of the High Court, disconnecting the accused persons with the crime, were based on a perfunctory consideration of evidence, [State of U.P. v.
Pheru Singh 1989 Supp (1) SCC] or based on extenuating circumstances which were purely based in imagination and fantasy [State of U.P. v. Pussu (1983) 3 SCC 502]
(b)Where the accused had been acquitted on ground of delay in conducting trial, which delay was attributable not to the tardiness or indifference of the prosecuting agencies, but to the conduct of the r accused himself; or where accused had been acquitted on ground of delay in conducting trial relating to an offence which is not of a trivial nature. [State of Maharashtra v. Champalal Punjaji Shah (1981) 3 SCC 610]."
11. In H.D. Sundara & others vs. State of Karnataka, (2023) 9 SCC 581, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that the appellate court cannot overturn acquittal only on the ground that after re-appreciating evidence, it is of the view that the guilt of the accused was established beyond a reasonable doubt. The relevant portion of the above judgment is as under:
"8. In this appeal, were are called upon to consider the legality and validity of the impugned judgment rendered by the High Court while deciding an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "CrPC"). The principles which govern the exercise of appellate jurisdiction while dealing with an appeal against acquittal ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 11 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) under Section 378 CrPC can be summarized as follows:
8.1. The acquittal of the accused further strengthens the presumption of innocence;
.
8.2. The appellate court, while hearing an appeal against acquittal, is entitled to reappreciate the oral and documentary evidence;
8.3. The appellate court, while deciding an appeal against acquittal, after reappreciating the evidence, is required to consider whether the view taken by the trial court is possible view which could have been taken on the basis of the evidence on record;
8.4. If the view taken is a possible view, the appellate court cannot overturn the order of acquittal on the ground that another view was also possible; and 8.5. The appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal only if it comes to a finding that the only conclusion which can be recorded on the basis of the evidence on record was that the guilt of the accused was proved beyond a reasonable doubt and no other conclusion was possible.
9. Normally, when an appellate court exercises appellate jurisdiction, the duty of the appellate court is to find out whether the verdict which is under challenge is correct or incorrect in law and on facts. The appellate court normally ascertains whether the decision under challenge is legal or illegal. But while dealing with an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court cannot examine the impugned judgment only to find out whether the view taken was correct or incorrect. After re-appreciating the oral and documentary evidence, the appellate court must first decide whether the trial court's view was a possible view. The appellate court cannot overturn acquittal only on the ground that after re-appreciating evidence, it is of the view that the guilt of the accused was established beyond a reasonable doubt. Only recording such a conclusion an order of acquittal cannot be reversed unless the appellate court also concludes that it was the ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS
12 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) only possible conclusion. Thus, the appellate court must see whether the view taken by the trial court while acquitting an accused can be reasonably taken on the basis of the evidence on record. If the view taken by the trial court is a possible view, the appellate court cannot .
interfere with the order of acquittal on the ground that another view could have been taken."
12. Thus, the law on the issue can be summarized to the effect that in exceptional cases where there are compelling circumstances, and the judgment under appeal is found to be perverse, the appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal. Further, if two views were possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the Appellate Court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the Trial Court, merely, because the Appellate Court could have arrived at a different conclusion than that of the Trial Court.
13. The burden of proof in a criminal trial never shifts and it is always the burden of the prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt on the basis of acceptable evidence. In fact, it is a settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that the more serious the offence, the stricter the degree of proof required, since a higher degree of assurance is required to convict the accused.
14. The edifice of the prosecution case stands on the pillars of the testimony of two key prosecution witnesses, i.e., PW-
1 Dr. Vinod Dhiman, who medically examined the deceased and ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 13 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) PW-3 Shri Pargat Singh (complainant), father of the deceased.
15. It would be apt to first discuss the testimony of PW-3 Shri Pargat Singh (complainant). He deposed that he had retired .
from Border Security Force and had three daughters and a son.
The name of his son was Arju Rana (the deceased). On 21.05.2014, Shashi Bala (daughter of this witness) was present in his house and around 4 p.m. his son told him that he wanted to go to the market for bringing some fruits. When his son did not return for about 45 minutes, they became apprehensive and his daughter Shashi Bala called Navdeep @ Laddi, who was the friend of his son, to enquire about the deceased. Navdeep told that he had seen his son in the company of Sunny and Baba (accused persons) going towards the house of accused Baba.
Subsequently, he alongwith his daughter Shashi Bala, daughter-in-
law Puja Devi and his nephew Munish Rana went in a private car to the house of the accused. When they reached the house of the accused, he saw accused Sunny and Baba pouring water on the head of his son with a bucket and accused Satnam and Bhupinder Kaur were standing alongside. On being asked, accused divulged that his son was given heroin injection and he should be shifted to Raja Hospital Nawanshehar. This witness further stated that he lifted his son (deceased) and took him to CHC Haroli in his car. At ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 14 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) CHC Haroli the Medical Officer attended his son and administered initial medication and he referred him to RH Una for further treatment. He also deposed that at RH Una his son expired. As .
per this witness, the accused persons had ample knowledge that administering injection of heroin would cause death of his son, but they still gave injection of heroin and caused his death.
16. Another key witness is PW-1 Dr. Vinod Dhiman, who medically examined the deceased at Civil Hospital Haroli. He deposed that on 21.05.2014, around 06:10 p.m., patient named Arju Rana (deceased) was brought to Civil Hospital, Haroli. As per this witness, the patient was unconscious with alleged history of poison. He deposed that he examined the patient and issued MLC, Ex. PW-1/A. As per this witness, there were puncture marks of needle on the elbow area of the patient. He gave his final opinion, based on FSL report. As per the RFSL report, diacetyl morphine (heroin) was detected in the blood sample. In his opinion, when the patient was brought to the hospital, he was intoxicated with heroin. This witness, in his cross-examination, deposed that in MLC, Ex. PW-1/A, he did not mention that the patient was intoxicated with the substance. He admitted that one Puja, wife of the patient, who had accompanied the patient, disclosed to him that the patient had consumed some white ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 15 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) powder. He also deposed that multiple pricks were found on the elbow region of the patient, which could be caused by needles at the hospital, if glucose or other intravenous fluids were .
administered to the patient during the treatment.
17. We have scrutinized the entire evidence on record and after closer scrutiny thereof, we are of the firm opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.
The perusal of the material on record shows that initially father of deceased Pargat Singh (PW-3) made a statement that his son Aarju Rana, aged 28 years, who was 10+2 and was married had developed the habit of consuming drugs and he used to take smack and on 21.05.2014, his son again consumed the drugs. He further disclosed that neither his son consumed any poisonous substance nor there was any other ill treatment at the house and he did not want any police action. To this effect rapat No. 38(A), Ex. PW-7/A, was also entered at police station on 21.05.2014, i.e., two days prior to the lodging of FIR, Ex. PW-18/B, dated 23.05.2014. Now, at this juncture, it would be relevant to refer to the testimony of PW-17 ASI Yogesh Kumar. He deposed that on the date of occurrence i.e. on 21.05.2014, the statement of Shri Pargat Singh (PW-3) father of the victim/complainant was also recorded. Though the said statements have not been placed on ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 16 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) record, but he admitted that on his return from the hospital, rapat No. 38A, Ex. PW-7/A, was also entered at police station on 21.05.2014. If rapat, Ex. PW-7/A, is read along with MLC, Ex.
.
PW-1/A, and the deposition of PW-1 Dr. Vinod Dhiman, it is clear that wife of the deceased had also accompanied her husband (since deceased) and she disclosed about the white powder as a substance having been consumed by the deceased. Even in the MLC issued by PW-1 Dr. Vinod Dhiman history was of some
18. to poisoning of white powder (over dose).
However in the FIR Ex. PW-18/B which was registered on 23.05.2014, the complainant took a complete somersault by stating that his son (deceased Aarju Rana) never used to take any drugs, but he was sick for about 5-6 months and had become very weak. Thus, the version of the complainant, as recorded in FIR, Ex. PW-18/B, is totally contrary and the same is neither reliable nor trustworthy. As per the complainant, when he reached the house of the accused persons, he saw accused Sunny and Baba pouring water over the head of his son (deceased) with a bucket and accused Satnam Singh and Bhupinder Kaur were standing alongside. However, the medico legal certificate, Ex. PW-1/A, nowhere shows that the clothes of the deceased were wet or there were any signs of wetness. Had it been the case that accused ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 17 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) persons had poured water on the head of the deceased, then at the time of medical examination of the deceased, doctor would have definitely mentioned such fact. Moreover, the complainant did .
not name accused Satnam and his wife Bhupinder Kaur in the FIR.
The Medical Officer (PW-1) categorically deposed that there were multiple puncture marks of the needle on the elbow area of the deceased, but he found no other external injury on the person of the deceased. Thus from the conjoint reading of the FIR alongwith Rapat, it cannot be said that the version in FIR, Ex. PW-18/B, dated 23.05.2014, is a reliable and trustworthy version.
19. As per the prosecution story the deceased was taken from the house of accused Satnam Singh. PW-18 Inspector Harjeet Singh, the then SHO Haroli, in his cross-examination, clearly deposed that house of accused Satnam Singh was located in the centre of populated area. Surprisingly, the police did not bother to examine any witness from the locality to prove that on the relevant day, the deceased was taken from the house of accused Satnam Singh as is later claimed on 23.05.2014 by complainant Shri Pargat Singh. The perusal of FIR, Ex. PW-18/A, shows that one Navdeep @ Laddi (PW-14) disclosed that the deceased was seen with accused Baba and Sunny going towards their house. This witness Navdeep alias Laddi was examined as ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 18 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) PW-14 who deposed that the deceased was his God brother and on 21.05.2014, sister of the deceased Sashi Bala, came to his shop at Tahliwal and enquired about the whereabouts of the .
deceased, However, he did not state at all that he told Shashi Bala that he had seen the deceased accompanied the accused towards their house. PW-14 was declared hostile and in his cross-
examination, he denied that on 21.05.2014 he had come to visit his grand-parents at village Dulehar. He also denied that at bus stop Dulehar he met accused Sunny and Baba alongwith the deceased and that the deceased told him that he was going to the house of accused Sunny and Baba. Rather, he specifically deposed that he did not meet the deceased on that day.
20. Dr. Vinod Dhiman (PW-1) categorically deposed that Puja (wife of the deceased) was with the deceased at the time of his checkup and she disclosed that the deceased had consumed some white powder. However, for the reasons best known to the prosecution, Puja was not examined by it, therefore an adverse inference has to be drawn against the prosecution for her non-
examination.
21. Dr. Daljeet Singh (PW-19) conducted the postmortem examination on the corpse of the deceased and his deposition reveals that that the time of the postmortem examination, no ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 19 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) additional information was provided by the relatives of the deceased, including the complainant. PW-14 deposed that on 11.08.2014 he examined the RFSL report and as per his opinion .
the deceased died due to morphine poisoning. However, no recovery of any contraband was effected from any of the accused.
22. Hence, in view of the entire evidence on record, it has become clear that there is nothing on record, which could, even remotely, establish the guilt of the accused persons beyond the scope of reasonable doubt.
23. to In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, no interference in the judgment of acquittal, dated 27.12.2016, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (II), Una, District Una, H.P., in Sessions Case No. 54 of 2014, is required. The view taken by the learned Trial Court was the only possible view, as such the appeal, which sans merits, deserves dismissal and is accordingly dismissed. Bail bonds are discharged.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand(s) disposed of.
( Vivek Singh Thakur ) Judge ( Sushil Kukreja ) Judge 22nd September, 2025 (virender) ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 1 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 258 of 2017 Reserved on: 05.09.2025 Decided on: 22.09.2025 .
_____________________________________________________ State of Himachal Pradesh .....Appellant.
Versus Satnam Singh & others ......Respondent.
_____________________________________________________ Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge.
1Whether approved for reporting?
_____________________________________________________ For the appellant: Mr. Yashwardhan Chauhan, Senior r Additional Advocate General.
For respondent No. 1: Mr. Vinod Thakur, Advocate, as Legal Aid Counsel.
For respondents No. 2 to 4: Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Suri, Advocate.
Sushil Kukreja, Judge.
The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against judgment, dated 27.12.2016, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (II), Una, District Una, H.P., in Sessions Case No. 54 of 2014, whereby the accused persons (respondents herein) were acquitted under Sections 304, 201 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short "IPC") and Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS2 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) "NDPS Act").
2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal, as per the prosecution story, can be summarized as under:
.
2(a). On 23.05.2014 complainant Shri Pargat Singh got recorded his statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C., wherein he stated that his son Arju Rana (since deceased) was working on daily wage basis in UCO Bank, Dulehar and he used to come to the house daily. He further stated that the deceased did not have any bad habit of consuming any intoxicating drugs etc., but 5-6 months back he fell sick and became weak.
r The complainant further stated that his uncle treated the deceased by administering injections of glucose and strength. On 21.05.2014 complainant's daughter Shashi Bala, who was married locally, came to their house and the complainant sent the deceased for bringing some fruits. When the deceased did not return home after an hour, Shashi Bala inquired from deceased's friend Navdeep @ Laddi about the deceased, who told her that he saw the deceased in the company of Sunny and Baba (accused persons), who were sons of Satnam Singh @ Satto (another accused) of village Heeran Thara towards their house. As per the complainant, thereafter he alongwith Shashi Bala and Munish Rana searched the deceased and reached the house of accused Satnam Singh, where they ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS
3 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) found accused persons Baba and Sunny pouring water over the head of the deceased. On being inquired by the complainant, as to what had happened, they asked him to take the deceased to .
Raja Hospital, Nawanshehar. On being again inquired as to how the deceased had become unconscious and what was given by them to him to eat, they told that the deceased was given an injection of heroin. Thereafter, the complainant took the deceased to CHC Haroli and subsequently to RH, Una, where the deceased had died. The complainant stated that the accused persons Sunny and Baba knew that after giving heroin injection, the deceased could die, but despite that they gave injection of heroin to the deceased with intention to cause his death. Police got conducted the postmortem on the corpse of the deceased and during the course of the investigation, scientific samples were collected. As per the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory Dharamshala, there was presence of morphine in the parts of heart and lungs and blood. Initially the investigation was carried-out by the police of Police Station, Haroli, and later on the case was transferred for investigation to CID. After conclusion of the investigation, it was unearthed that there was involvement of accused Satnam Singh and Bhupinder Kaur. After completion of the investigation, police presented the charge-sheet before the learned Trial Court.
::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS4 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB )
3. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined nineteen witnesses. Statement of the accused persons, under Section 313 Cr.P.C., was recorded, wherein they pleaded not guilty .
and claimed trial.
4. The learned Trial Court, vide impugned judgment dated 27.12.2016 acquitted all the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 304, 201 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 21 of the NDPS Act, hence the instant appeal preferred by the appellant/State.
5. to The learned Senior Additional Advocate General for the appellant/State contended that the impugned judgment is against the law and facts, based upon surmises and conjectures, thus liable to set-aside. He further contended that the learned Trial Court has failed to appreciate the evidence in its right and true perspective, as such the impugned judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court deserves to be quashed and set-aside by allowing the instant appeal.
6. Conversely, Legal Aid Counsel for accused/respondent No. 1 and learned counsel for accused persons/respondents No..
2 to 4 contended that the judgment passed by the learned Trial Court is the result of proper appreciation of the material on record and the same was passed after appreciating the evidence and law ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 5 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) in its right and true perspective. They further contended that the learned Trial Court has passed a well reasoned judgment, which does not require any interference, thus the instant appeal, which is .
devoid of any merit, be dismissed.
7. We have heard the learned Senior Additional Advocate General for the appellant/State, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the accused/respondent No. 1, learned counsel for accused/respondents No. 2 to 4 and carefully examined the entire records.
8. to It is well settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in a catena of decisions that an Appellate Court has full power to review, re-
appreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded. However, Appellate Court must bear in mind that in case of acquittal there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent Court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial Court.
Further, if two reasonable views are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the Appellate Court should not disturb the ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 6 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) finding of acquittal recorded by the trial Court.
9. The scope of power of Appellate Court in case of appeal against acquittal has been dealt with by the Hon'ble Apex .
Court in Muralidhar alias Gidda & another Vs. State of Karnataka reported in (2014) 5 SCC 730, which reads as under:
"10. Lord Russell in Sheo Swarup[1], highlighted the approach of the High Court as an appellate court hearing the appeal against acquittal. Lord Russell said, "... the High Court should and will always give proper weight and consideration to such matters as (1) the views of the trial Judge as to the credibility of the witnesses; (2) the presumption of innocence in favour of the r accused, a presumption certainly not weakened by the fact that he has been acquitted at his trial; (3) the right of the accused to the benefit of any doubt; and (4) the slowness of an appellate court in disturbing a finding of fact arrived at by a Judge who had the advantage of seeing the witnesses."
The opinion of the Lord Russell has been followed over the years.
11. As early as in 1952, this Court in Surajpal Singh[2] while dealing with the powers of the High Court in an appeal against acquittal under Section 417 of the Criminal Procedure Code observed:
"7...........the High Court has full power to review the evidence upon which the order of acquittal was founded, but it is equally well settled that the presumption of innocence of the accused is further reinforced by his acquittal by the trial court, and the findings of the trial court which had the advantage of seeing the witnesses and hearing their evidence can be reversed only for very substantial and compelling reasons."
12. The approach of the appellate court in the appeal against acquittal has been dealt with by this Court ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 7 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) in Tulsiram Kanu [3], Madan Mohan Singh [4], Atley [5] , Aher Raja Khima [6], Balbir Singh [7], M.G. Agarwal [8], Noor Khan [9], Khedu Mohton [10], Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade [11], Lekha Yadav [12], Khem Karan [13], Bishan Singh [14], Umedbhai Jadavbhai [15], K. Gopal Reddy [16], Tota Singh .
[17], Ram Kumar [18], Madan Lal [19], Sambasivan [20], Bhagwan Singh [21], Harijana Thirupala [22], C. Antony [23], K. Gopalakrishna [24], Sanjay Thakran [25] and Chandrappa [26]. It is not necessary to deal with these cases individually.
Suffice it to say that this Court has consistently held that in dealing with appeals against acquittal, the appellate court must bear in mind the following:
(i) There is presumption of innocence in favour of an accused person and such presumption is strengthened by the order of acquittal passed in his favour by the trial court;
(ii) The accused person is entitled to the benefit of reasonable doubt when it deals with the r merit of the appeal against acquittal;
(iii) Though, the power of the appellate court in considering the appeals against acquittal are as extensive as its powers in appeals against convictions but the appellate court is generally loath in disturbing the finding of fact recorded by the trial court. It is so because the trial court had an advantage of seeing the demeanor of the witnesses. If the trial court takes a reasonable view of the facts of the case, interference by the appellate court with the judgment of acquittal is not justified.
Unless, the conclusions reached by the trial court are palpably wrong or based on erroneous view of the law or if such conclusions are allowed to stand, they are likely to result in grave injustice, the reluctance on the part of the appellate court in interfering with such conclusions is fully justified; and
(iv) Merely because the appellate court on re-
appreciation and re-evaluation of the evidence is inclined to take a different view, interference with the judgment of acquittal is not justified if the view taken by the trial court is a possible view. The evenly balanced views of the evidence must not result in the ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 8 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) interference by the appellate court in the judgment of the trial court."
10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajesh Prasad vs. State of Bihar & another, (2022) 3 SCC 471, observed as under:
.
"31. The circumstances under which an appeal would be entertained by this Court from an order of acquittal passed by a High Court may be summarized as follows:
31.1. Ordinarily, this Court is cautious in interfering with an order of acquittal, especially when the order of acquittal has been confirmed up to the High Court. It is only in rarest of rare cases, where the High Court, on an absolutely wrong process of reasoning and a legally erroneous and perverse approach to the facts of the case, ignoring some of the most vital facts, has acquitted the accused, that the same may be r reversed by this Court, exercising jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution. [State of U.P. v. Sahai (1982) 1 SCC 352] Such fetters on the right to entertain an appeal are prompted by the reluctance to expose a person, who has been acquitted by a competent court of a criminal charge, to the anxiety and tension of a further examination of the case, even though it is held by a superior court. [Arunchalam v. P.S.R. Sadhanantham (1979) 2 SCC 297] An appeal cannot be entertained against an order of acquittal which has, after recording valid and weighty reasons, has arrived at an unassailable, logical conclusion which justifies acquittal. [State of Haryana vs. Lakhbir] 31.2. However, this Court has on certain occasions, set aside the order of acquittal passed by a High Court. The circumstances under which this Court may entertain an appeal against an order of acquittal and pass an order of conviction, may be summarized as follows:
31.2.1. Where the approach or reasoning of the High Court is perverse;
(a) Where incontrovertible evidence has been rejected by the High Court based on suspicion and surmises, which are rather ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 9 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) unrealistic. [State of Rajasthan v. Sukhpal Singh (1983) 1 SCC 393] For example, where direct, unanimous accounts of the eyewitnesses, were discounted without cogent reasoning. [State of U.P. vs. Shanker 1980 Supp SCC 489] .
(b) Where the intrinsic merits of the testimony of relatives, living in the same house as the prosecutrix, were discounted on the ground that they were "interested"
witnesses. [State of U.P. v. Hakim Singh (1980)
(c) Where testimony of witnesses had been disbelieved by the High Court, on an unrealistic conjecture of personal motive on the part of witnesses to implicate the accused, when in fact, the witnesses had no axe to grind in the said matter. [State of Rajasthan v. Sukhpal Singh (1983) 1 SCC 393]
(d) Where dying declaration of the deceased prosecutrix was rejected by the High Court on an irrelevant ground that they did not explain the injury found on one of the persons present at the site of occurrence of the crime. [Arunachalam vs. P.S.R. Sadhanantham (1979) 2 SCC 297]
(e) Where the High Court applied an unrealistic standard of "implicit proof" rather than that of "proof beyond reasonable doubt" and therefore evaluated the evidence in a flawed manner. [State of U.P. v. Ranjha Ram (1986) 4 SCC 99]
(f) Where the High Court rejected circumstantial evidence, based on an exaggerated and capricious theory, which were beyond the plea of the accused;
[State of Maharashtra v. Champalal Punjaji Shah (1981) 3 SCC 610]
(g) Where the High Court acquitted the accused on the ground that he had no adequate motive to commit the offence, although, in the said case, there was strong direct evidence establishing the guilt of the accused, thereby making it ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 10 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) necessary on the part of the prosecution to establish "motive". [State of A.P. v. Bogam Chandraiah (1990) 1 SCC 445] 31.2.2.Where acquittal would result is gross miscarriage of justice;
.
(a) Where the findings of the High Court, disconnecting the accused persons with the crime, were based on a perfunctory consideration of evidence, [State of U.P. v.
Pheru Singh 1989 Supp (1) SCC] or based on extenuating circumstances which were purely based in imagination and fantasy [State of U.P. v. Pussu (1983) 3 SCC 502]
(b)Where the accused had been acquitted on ground of delay in conducting trial, which delay was attributable not to the tardiness or indifference of the prosecuting agencies, but to the conduct of the r accused himself; or where accused had been acquitted on ground of delay in conducting trial relating to an offence which is not of a trivial nature. [State of Maharashtra v. Champalal Punjaji Shah (1981) 3 SCC 610]."
11. In H.D. Sundara & others vs. State of Karnataka, (2023) 9 SCC 581, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that the appellate court cannot overturn acquittal only on the ground that after re-appreciating evidence, it is of the view that the guilt of the accused was established beyond a reasonable doubt. The relevant portion of the above judgment is as under:
"8. In this appeal, were are called upon to consider the legality and validity of the impugned judgment rendered by the High Court while deciding an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "CrPC"). The principles which govern the exercise of appellate jurisdiction while dealing with an appeal against acquittal ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 11 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) under Section 378 CrPC can be summarized as follows:
8.1. The acquittal of the accused further strengthens the presumption of innocence;
.
8.2. The appellate court, while hearing an appeal against acquittal, is entitled to reappreciate the oral and documentary evidence;
8.3. The appellate court, while deciding an appeal against acquittal, after reappreciating the evidence, is required to consider whether the view taken by the trial court is possible view which could have been taken on the basis of the evidence on record;
8.4. If the view taken is a possible view, the appellate court cannot overturn the order of acquittal on the ground that another view was also possible; and 8.5. The appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal only if it comes to a finding that the only conclusion which can be recorded on the basis of the evidence on record was that the guilt of the accused was proved beyond a reasonable doubt and no other conclusion was possible.
9. Normally, when an appellate court exercises appellate jurisdiction, the duty of the appellate court is to find out whether the verdict which is under challenge is correct or incorrect in law and on facts. The appellate court normally ascertains whether the decision under challenge is legal or illegal. But while dealing with an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court cannot examine the impugned judgment only to find out whether the view taken was correct or incorrect. After re-appreciating the oral and documentary evidence, the appellate court must first decide whether the trial court's view was a possible view. The appellate court cannot overturn acquittal only on the ground that after re-appreciating evidence, it is of the view that the guilt of the accused was established beyond a reasonable doubt. Only recording such a conclusion an order of acquittal cannot be reversed unless the appellate court also concludes that it was the ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS
12 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) only possible conclusion. Thus, the appellate court must see whether the view taken by the trial court while acquitting an accused can be reasonably taken on the basis of the evidence on record. If the view taken by the trial court is a possible view, the appellate court cannot .
interfere with the order of acquittal on the ground that another view could have been taken."
12. Thus, the law on the issue can be summarized to the effect that in exceptional cases where there are compelling circumstances, and the judgment under appeal is found to be perverse, the appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal. Further, if two views were possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the Appellate Court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the Trial Court, merely, because the Appellate Court could have arrived at a different conclusion than that of the Trial Court.
13. The burden of proof in a criminal trial never shifts and it is always the burden of the prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt on the basis of acceptable evidence. In fact, it is a settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that the more serious the offence, the stricter the degree of proof required, since a higher degree of assurance is required to convict the accused.
14. The edifice of the prosecution case stands on the pillars of the testimony of two key prosecution witnesses, i.e., PW-
1 Dr. Vinod Dhiman, who medically examined the deceased and ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 13 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) PW-3 Shri Pargat Singh (complainant), father of the deceased.
15. It would be apt to first discuss the testimony of PW-3 Shri Pargat Singh (complainant). He deposed that he had retired .
from Border Security Force and had three daughters and a son.
The name of his son was Arju Rana (the deceased). On 21.05.2014, Shashi Bala (daughter of this witness) was present in his house and around 4 p.m. his son told him that he wanted to go to the market for bringing some fruits. When his son did not return for about 45 minutes, they became apprehensive and his daughter Shashi Bala called Navdeep @ Laddi, who was the friend of his son, to enquire about the deceased. Navdeep told that he had seen his son in the company of Sunny and Baba (accused persons) going towards the house of accused Baba.
Subsequently, he alongwith his daughter Shashi Bala, daughter-in-
law Puja Devi and his nephew Munish Rana went in a private car to the house of the accused. When they reached the house of the accused, he saw accused Sunny and Baba pouring water on the head of his son with a bucket and accused Satnam and Bhupinder Kaur were standing alongside. On being asked, accused divulged that his son was given heroin injection and he should be shifted to Raja Hospital Nawanshehar. This witness further stated that he lifted his son (deceased) and took him to CHC Haroli in his car. At ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 14 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) CHC Haroli the Medical Officer attended his son and administered initial medication and he referred him to RH Una for further treatment. He also deposed that at RH Una his son expired. As .
per this witness, the accused persons had ample knowledge that administering injection of heroin would cause death of his son, but they still gave injection of heroin and caused his death.
16. Another key witness is PW-1 Dr. Vinod Dhiman, who medically examined the deceased at Civil Hospital Haroli. He deposed that on 21.05.2014, around 06:10 p.m., patient named Arju Rana (deceased) was brought to Civil Hospital, Haroli. As per this witness, the patient was unconscious with alleged history of poison. He deposed that he examined the patient and issued MLC, Ex. PW-1/A. As per this witness, there were puncture marks of needle on the elbow area of the patient. He gave his final opinion, based on FSL report. As per the RFSL report, diacetyl morphine (heroin) was detected in the blood sample. In his opinion, when the patient was brought to the hospital, he was intoxicated with heroin. This witness, in his cross-examination, deposed that in MLC, Ex. PW-1/A, he did not mention that the patient was intoxicated with the substance. He admitted that one Puja, wife of the patient, who had accompanied the patient, disclosed to him that the patient had consumed some white ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 15 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) powder. He also deposed that multiple pricks were found on the elbow region of the patient, which could be caused by needles at the hospital, if glucose or other intravenous fluids were .
administered to the patient during the treatment.
17. We have scrutinized the entire evidence on record and after closer scrutiny thereof, we are of the firm opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.
The perusal of the material on record shows that initially father of deceased Pargat Singh (PW-3) made a statement that his son Aarju Rana, aged 28 years, who was 10+2 and was married had developed the habit of consuming drugs and he used to take smack and on 21.05.2014, his son again consumed the drugs. He further disclosed that neither his son consumed any poisonous substance nor there was any other ill treatment at the house and he did not want any police action. To this effect rapat No. 38(A), Ex. PW-7/A, was also entered at police station on 21.05.2014, i.e., two days prior to the lodging of FIR, Ex. PW-18/B, dated 23.05.2014. Now, at this juncture, it would be relevant to refer to the testimony of PW-17 ASI Yogesh Kumar. He deposed that on the date of occurrence i.e. on 21.05.2014, the statement of Shri Pargat Singh (PW-3) father of the victim/complainant was also recorded. Though the said statements have not been placed on ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 16 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) record, but he admitted that on his return from the hospital, rapat No. 38A, Ex. PW-7/A, was also entered at police station on 21.05.2014. If rapat, Ex. PW-7/A, is read along with MLC, Ex.
.
PW-1/A, and the deposition of PW-1 Dr. Vinod Dhiman, it is clear that wife of the deceased had also accompanied her husband (since deceased) and she disclosed about the white powder as a substance having been consumed by the deceased. Even in the MLC issued by PW-1 Dr. Vinod Dhiman history was of some
18. to poisoning of white powder (over dose).
However in the FIR Ex. PW-18/B which was registered on 23.05.2014, the complainant took a complete somersault by stating that his son (deceased Aarju Rana) never used to take any drugs, but he was sick for about 5-6 months and had become very weak. Thus, the version of the complainant, as recorded in FIR, Ex. PW-18/B, is totally contrary and the same is neither reliable nor trustworthy. As per the complainant, when he reached the house of the accused persons, he saw accused Sunny and Baba pouring water over the head of his son (deceased) with a bucket and accused Satnam Singh and Bhupinder Kaur were standing alongside. However, the medico legal certificate, Ex. PW-1/A, nowhere shows that the clothes of the deceased were wet or there were any signs of wetness. Had it been the case that accused ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 17 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) persons had poured water on the head of the deceased, then at the time of medical examination of the deceased, doctor would have definitely mentioned such fact. Moreover, the complainant did .
not name accused Satnam and his wife Bhupinder Kaur in the FIR.
The Medical Officer (PW-1) categorically deposed that there were multiple puncture marks of the needle on the elbow area of the deceased, but he found no other external injury on the person of the deceased. Thus from the conjoint reading of the FIR alongwith Rapat, it cannot be said that the version in FIR, Ex. PW-18/B, dated 23.05.2014, is a reliable and trustworthy version.
19. As per the prosecution story the deceased was taken from the house of accused Satnam Singh. PW-18 Inspector Harjeet Singh, the then SHO Haroli, in his cross-examination, clearly deposed that house of accused Satnam Singh was located in the centre of populated area. Surprisingly, the police did not bother to examine any witness from the locality to prove that on the relevant day, the deceased was taken from the house of accused Satnam Singh as is later claimed on 23.05.2014 by complainant Shri Pargat Singh. The perusal of FIR, Ex. PW-18/A, shows that one Navdeep @ Laddi (PW-14) disclosed that the deceased was seen with accused Baba and Sunny going towards their house. This witness Navdeep alias Laddi was examined as ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 18 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) PW-14 who deposed that the deceased was his God brother and on 21.05.2014, sister of the deceased Sashi Bala, came to his shop at Tahliwal and enquired about the whereabouts of the .
deceased, However, he did not state at all that he told Shashi Bala that he had seen the deceased accompanied the accused towards their house. PW-14 was declared hostile and in his cross-
examination, he denied that on 21.05.2014 he had come to visit his grand-parents at village Dulehar. He also denied that at bus stop Dulehar he met accused Sunny and Baba alongwith the deceased and that the deceased told him that he was going to the house of accused Sunny and Baba. Rather, he specifically deposed that he did not meet the deceased on that day.
20. Dr. Vinod Dhiman (PW-1) categorically deposed that Puja (wife of the deceased) was with the deceased at the time of his checkup and she disclosed that the deceased had consumed some white powder. However, for the reasons best known to the prosecution, Puja was not examined by it, therefore an adverse inference has to be drawn against the prosecution for her non-
examination.
21. Dr. Daljeet Singh (PW-19) conducted the postmortem examination on the corpse of the deceased and his deposition reveals that that the time of the postmortem examination, no ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS 19 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:32951-DB ) additional information was provided by the relatives of the deceased, including the complainant. PW-14 deposed that on 11.08.2014 he examined the RFSL report and as per his opinion .
the deceased died due to morphine poisoning. However, no recovery of any contraband was effected from any of the accused.
22. Hence, in view of the entire evidence on record, it has become clear that there is nothing on record, which could, even remotely, establish the guilt of the accused persons beyond the scope of reasonable doubt.
23. to In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, no interference in the judgment of acquittal, dated 27.12.2016, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (II), Una, District Una, H.P., in Sessions Case No. 54 of 2014, is required. The view taken by the learned Trial Court was the only possible view, as such the appeal, which sans merits, deserves dismissal and is accordingly dismissed. Bail bonds are discharged.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand(s) disposed of.
( Vivek Singh Thakur ) Judge ( Sushil Kukreja ) Judge 22nd September, 2025 (virender) ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2025 21:30:04 :::CIS