This appeal is filed by the State represented by the Public Prosecutor against the order acquitting the respondent who was charged under S. 3(a) of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act.

2. The Prosecutor's case is that, on 17th December, 1978 at about 5.10 a.m. at Korukkupet Goods shed, the respondent/accused was found to be in possession of two A.C. bearing plates belonging to the Railways and the same were recovered from him. When questioned, the accused could not account for the same, but gave a confessional statement under Ex. P2 admitting the offence. Hence, the charge.

3. In the Trial Court, the accused denied the offence and no witness was examined on his side. The prosecution examined three witnesses and produced Ex. P1 to P3. The gunny bag and the two A.C. bearing blades were marked as M.O. 1 and M.O. 2 series respectively. The learned Magistrate found that the prosecution has not proved beyond doubt that the Articles seized belonged to the Railways and, therefore, acquitted the respondent/accused. Hence, the appeal by the State.

4. The respondent is represented by Mr. T. Munirathina Naidu, Advocate nominated by the High Court Legal Aid Center. I have he