State of H.P. vs. Maya Devi & Anr. Cr.MP(M) No.2183 of 2025 09.12.2025 Present: Mr. H.S. Rawat, Additional Advocate General, with Mr. Rohit Sharma and Ms. Ranjna Patial, Deputy Advocates General, for the applicant/State. Ms. Shrutika Chauhan, Advocate, for the respondent. Cr.MP(M) No.2183 of 2025 By way of the present application, indulgence of this Court has been sought to permit the applicant/State to file appeal, against the acquittal. 2. As per the factual position, involved in the present case, the respondents have been convicted by the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Una, District Una, H.P., (hereinafter referred to as the trial Court), in Case Police Challan RBT No.17-II-16/2009, dated 19.03.2022 and order of sentence dated 23.03.2022, they have been sentenced, as under:- Name of accused/ Convict Punishment for the offence under Section 120 B of IPC Punishment for the offence under Section 420 of IPC Rajinder Pal Singh Simple imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs.1,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the convict shall suffer further simple imprisonment for Rigorous imprisonment for three years months and fine of Rs.5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the convict shall suffer further simple imprisonment for five months one month Maya Devi Simple imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs.1,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the convict shall suffer further simple imprisonment for one month Rigorous imprisonment for three years months and fine of Rs.5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the convict shall suffer further simple imprisonment for five months Gurjit Singh Simple imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs.1,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the convict shall suffer further simple imprisonment for one month Rigorous imprisonment for three years months and fine of Rs.5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the convict shall suffer further simple imprisonment for five months 3. Aggrieved from the said judgment of conviction and order or sentence, passed by the learned trial Court, the non-applicants-Maya Devi and Gurjeet Singh have filed the appeal, before Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Una, District Una, H.P. (hereinafter referred as the learned Appellate Court). 4. The said appeal was decided on 30.04.2025 by the learned Appellate Court and both the non-applicants were acquitted for the offences for which, they have been convicted by the learned trial Court. 5. Now, the applicant-State has assailed the judgment of acquittal, passed by the learned Appellate Court, before this Court, mainly on the ground that the learned Appellate Court has not considered the evidence, especially, the statement of PW-6, in the right perspective. Similarly, relying upon the statements of PW-1, PW-2 and PW-3, it has been argued that the necessary permission to assail the judgment of acquittal may kindly be accorded, in favour of the applicant. 6. The application has been resisted by the non- applicants, by filing reply. In the reply, the non-applicants have pleaded that the learned Appellate Court has rightly considered the evidence, in the right perspective and a well reasoned judgment passed by the learned Appellate Court does not require any interference by this Court. 7. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances, according to which, both the non-applicants, along with one Rajinder Pal Singh, were convicted by the learned trial Court and on the appeal, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned trial Court has been set-aside by the learned Appellate Court. 8. Considering the fact that the judgment of conviction has mainly been set-aside, on the ground that the prosecution could not prove the guilt of the applicants, whereas, the documentary evidence, according to learned Additional Advocate General has not been considered in the right perspective, this Court is of the view that the requisite leave to appeal is required to be given to the applicant-State. Ordered accordingly. 9. Application is accordingly disposed of. Cr. Appeal No.____ of 2025 10. Be registered. 11. Admit. 12. Respondents, through their counsel, are directed to furnish the personal bonds, in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each, with one surety each, in the like amount, within four weeks, to the satisfaction of learned trial Court, by giving solemn undertaking that they will surrender before this Court or before the learned trial Court, in case of ultimate acceptance of the present appeal and shall not leave the country, without permission of the Court. (Virender Singh) Judge December 09, 2025 (subhash)