Panchkula, Aug. 12 -- A local court on Monday acquitted a 24-year-old Uttar Pradesh resident in a 2024 snatching case, citing prosecution failure. The sessions court of judge Ved Parkash Sirohi observed that the police has failed to prove its case against the accused and highlighted multiple failures, including not conducting a test identification parade (TIP) and inability to prove the recovery of the snatched mobile phone from the accused. "The prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case against accused Chhote Lal, son of Spattar Singh, beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, he is acquitted of the charge levelled against him," the court order read. The case dates back to February 3, 2024. In her complaint to police, Pinki, a technical assistant from the panchayati raj department in Una, Himachal had alleged that on January 26, 2024, while travelling from Jaipur to Una on the Sabarmati-Daulatpur Chowk train, an unknown person snatched her purse as the train departed from Chandigarh railway station at approximately 8.30 am. The purse contained her mobile phone, Aadhaar card, PAN card, ATM card, and some cash. Based on this complaint, a snatching case was registered by GRP, Chandigarh on February 3, 2024, under Sections 379-A, 411, and 201 of the IPC. Chhote Lal was arrested on March 3, 2024. The police had claimed that during their investigation, ASI Babita was informed by head constable Gurmail Singh that Chhote Lal, who was already in custody for another FIR from October 10, 2023, had confessed to the crime in this case. Consequently, Chhote Lal was arrested on March 3 in connection with this snatching incident. The police further claimed that following his disclosure statement, Chhote Lal led them to the snatched cellphone (without a SIM card), which was later identified by the complainant. The court found a major contradiction in the police's account of the recovery of the mobile phone recovery. Police claimed the phone was found in a purse near the Chandigarh railway station after a disclosure statement from the accused. However, a key prosecution witness, Kushal Kumar, testified that the accused had sold him the mobile phone and the police recovered it from his tea stall. The court concluded this discrepancy proved the police's disclosure statement and recovery memo were "forged". The judge also noted that the complainant had not provided a physical description of the accused in her initial complaint, and the police failed to conduct a TIP. As a result, her in-court identification was deemed "meaningless" in the eyes of the law. The absence of crucial CCTV footage from the crime scene, despite cameras being installed at the railway station, was also noted as a serious lapse. The court ruled that the prosecution failed to prove the offence under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code because there was no evidence that the accused threw the complainant's purse into a goods train. The court also held that the accused's later demarcation of the crime scene was irrelevant, as the police already knew its location before his arrest. Citing miserable failure of prosecution to prove its case against beyond reasonable doubt, the court acquitted Chotte Lal....