IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr. Revision No. 64 of 2014

Reserved on: 11.11.2025

Date of Decision: 03.12.2025.

Pawan Kumar @ Pammi ...Petitioner

Versus

State of HP ...Respondent

Coram

Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?¹ No.

For the Petitioner : Mr Manoj Pathak, Advocate. For the Respondent/State : Mr Ajit Sharma, Deputy

g Advocate General.

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge

The present revision is directed against the judgment

dated 3.1.2014, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur (learned Appellate Court), vide which the judgment of conviction dated 9.1.2013 and order of sentence dated 10.1.2013, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.1, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur (learned

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

Trial Court) were upheld. (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 petition are that the victim (name being withheld to protect her identity) went to the market on 7.8.2009 to purchase the bangles. She went t