G. M. LODHA, J. - (1.) THE appellants, namely Ram Swaroop & Kanhiya have been convicted under Section 307 I. P. C. and sentenced to 3 years' R. I. with fine of Rs. 200/- in default 2 months' R. I. According to the prosecution version, the two accused Kanhiya and Ram Swaroop, were the decoits and they were responsible for stopping the Truck near village 'rijhoni'. Rameshwar was leader of that dacoits. THE police party reached there and the accused party started firing the guns. THE police party replied the encounter.
(2.) ROSHAN Lal (PW 5), Har Vilas (PW 6) were caught by these accused and were being kept as captives at that time. The dacoits party left them and ran away. Both the appellants have been acquitted of the offence under Section 347 I. P. C. Having heard the learned counsel and the Public Prosecutor, I have perused the relevant record. It is true that merely because the evidence is of the police officer it cannot be discarded. The settled legal position is that conviction can be based on the testimony of even a single police officer, if his statement inspires confidence. In the present case the, situation is slightly different. The accused were not cought hold at the spot. The police was not acting promptly. No identification parade was held.
(3.) THE most important infirmity in the prosecution case is that both these persons namely Roshan Lal and Har Vilas have not identified the accused as the persons who were the dacoits in this encounter. Bar Vilas has categorically stated that these accused were not there in this incident. Har Vilas was not cross-examined from his police statement given earlier and therefore, the only conclusion or inference which can be drawn is that Har Vilas is truth full witness. I am inclined to accept the contention that under these circumstances that merely because the allegation is of dacoity or because the incident took place in Dholpur area which is known as dacoit's ingested area a judicial court can not convict the accused. ;