2025:UHC:2489 1 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Appeal No. 211 of 2015 02nd April, 2025 Cantonment Board ………….Appellant Versus Sanjay Narang ………...Respondent ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Birendra Singh Adhikari, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Aditya Singh, Advocate for the respondent. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral) This appeal is preferred by the appellant-complainant assailing the judgment and order dated 26.03.2015 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun in Criminal Complaint Case No.2769 of 2014. By the said judgment, the said court has acquitted the respondent accused person of the offence punishable under Sections 239 and 313 of Cantonment Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as “Act of 2006”). 2. The facts in brief are that one Mr. Vishal was directed by Letter No.13/157/Vol-IV/CBL/09 to seize material used for unauthorized construction on a property bearing Survey No.157 A known “Dahiliya Bank”, but when he reached there the accused person obstructed him to enter the alleged property & thereby prevented him to seize the material, thereby committing offence punishable under Sections 239 and 313 of Act of 2006. The trial court after recording statement of appellant under Sections 200 and 202 of Cr.P.C. summoned the accused under Sections 239 and 313 of Act of 2006. 3. During trial only one witness was produced by prosecution in order to prove its case. Thereafter, the statement of respondent-accused was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. in which he denied prosecution story. The trial court at end of trial has recorded the finding of acquittal. Hence, this appeal. 2025:UHC:2489 2 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that even after cogent ocular evidence available on record regarding alleged unauthorized construction and obstruction in entering the premises thereby preventing the seizure of material the trial court has acquitted the accused. 5. In this matter learned trial court disbelieved the story of the appellant on the grounds that in spite of the fact that the person obstructed by the accused person reached the office on the same day, he complained about the alleged incident after a delay of five days which according to trial court raised suspicion. 6. The trial court disbelieved the story of appellant on the ground that the authority to enter the premises for seizing the material was granted by an authorized official. 7. The denial of the presence of the accused at the relevant time of the alleged incident by the only PW also contributed to the decision of acquittal. 8. Heard and perused the Trial Court Record very carefully with the help of learned counsel for the parties. The finding recoded by the learned trial court is quite convincing and needs no interference. 9. There is yet another aspect of the matter. The respondent has been acquitted. In appeal against acquittal, it is held by Apex Court in catena of judgments that the Courts should be slow in interfering in the judgments of acquittal as the innocence of the accused is further re-enforced by his acquittal. Unless and until there is perversity in the judgment of acquittal, the same should not be interfered with. 10. It is trite law that that while hearing the appeal against acquittal, the power of reviewing evidence must be exercised with great care and caution. In order to ensure that the innocents are not punished, the appellate court should attach due weight to the lower court’s acquittal because the presumption of the innocence is further 2025:UHC:2489 3 strengthened by the acquittal. The appellate court should reverse an acquittal only when it has “very substantial and compelling reasons”. I am fortified in my view by the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Ghurey Lal Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in (2008) 10 SCC 450. For the sake of convenience, paragraph no.3 of the said judgment is quoted below:- “3. We have endeavoured to set out the guidelines for the appellate courts in dealing with appeals against acquittal. An overriding theme emanates from the law on appeals against acquittals. The appellate court is given wide powers to review the evidence to come to its own conclusions. But this power must be exercised with great care and caution. In order to ensure that the innocents are not punished, the appellate court should attach due weight to the lower court’s acquittal because the presumption of innocence is further strengthened by the acquittal. The appellate court should, therefore, reverse an acquittal only when it has “very substantial and compelling reasons”. 11. The trial court has passed an elaborate judgment for recording the finding of acquittal and this Court does not want to reiterate the same for the sake of repetition. 12. Learned counsel for the appellant could not argue any ground so as to interfere with the well reasoned judgment passed by the trial court. 13. For the aforesaid reasons and following the dictum of the Apex Court, I am also of the considered view that no ground for interference, at all, is made out in this matter, as there is no illegality and perversity in the impugned judgment and order. Consequently, the judgment and order dated 26.03.2015 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun in Criminal Complaint Case No.2769 of 2014 is hereby affirmed. 14. Appeal is bereft of merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. 15. Let the T.C.R. be immediately sent back to the trial court for consignment. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 02.04.2025 SK