State of Himachal Pradesh vs Anil Kumar

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(HP) 1795

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
State of Himachal Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Anil Kumar – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr Ajit Sharma, Deputy Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr Shivangi Sharma, Advocate, vice Mr Vikas Rajput, Advocate.

Table of Content
1. liquor recovery facts; trial conviction; appellate acquittal. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
2. parties contend on evidence contradictions and interference. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
3. acquittal interference only if perverse or unreasonable. (Para 13 , 14 , 15)
4. doubts from raid party, no independents, gunny inconsistencies, seals. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
5. sample seal link evidence missing; integrity suspect. (Para 20 , 21 , 22)
6. acquittal reasonable; state appeal dismissed. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26)

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

The appellant has filed the present appeal against the judgment dated 27.08.2012 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Kangra at Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. (learned Appellate Court), vide which the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31.08.2006 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial, Baijnath, District Kangra, H.P. (learned Trial Court) were set aside. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the police presented a challan