JUDGMENT

Ravindra V. Ghuge, J. - By this appeal, the State has challenged the judgment dated 14/08/2012, delivered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kopargaon, in Sessions Case No.19 of 2010. The respondent accused was acquitted of the charge of having committed an offence punishable under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The Trial Court has wrongly mentioned Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code in the opening paragraph of the judgment. Neither in the FIR, nor in the charge framed, Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, has been attracted.

2. We have considered the strenuous submissions of the learned Prosecutor, who has taken us through the appeal paper book and the original record & proceedings, threadbare. He has analyzed the testimonies of all 9 witnesses. He has strenuously contended that the version of the prosecutrix has to be properly appreciated and, in the absence of any ulterior or oblique motive on the part of the prosecutrix in framing the accused, the Court has to consider such testimonies in the light of the entire oral and documentary evidence available.

3. At the very outset, we need to record our strong displeasure about the choice of a particular