IMPORTANT POINT
An acquittal strengthens the presumption of innocence, and an appellate court can only overturn such a judgment if it finds that the trial court's conclusion was unreasonable or unsupported by evidence.

JUDGMENT :

Manoj Kumar Garg, J.

1. The petitioner complainant has filed the present Criminal revision against the judgment dated 06.06.2017 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Bhilwara in Appeal No.18/2016 whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner and upheld the order dated 11.05.2016 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate (East) Bhilwara in whereby, he acquitted the accused for offence under Section 452/34, 384/34 and Section 323/34 IPC.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant submitted a written report at Police station Pratap Nagar, Bhilwara stating therein that on 08.11.2017 when she was alone in her house, at that time, accused persons armed with sticks and weapons forcibly entered into her house and started beating her. They also obtained her signatures on black papers and damaged household articles. On this report a FIR No. 551/2010 was registered against the respondents for offence under Sections 452, 354, 323, 384, 341, 120B IPC. After investigation, challan was presented against the respondents before the competent court.

3. The trial Court framed charge against the accused respondents for offence under Section 452/34, 384/34, 323/34 IPC. The accused respondents denied the charges and claimed to be tried.

4. The prosecution in support of its case recorded statements of eight witnesses and exhibited various documents. The statement of accused respondents under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded but he did not produce any evidence in defence. After hearing arguments of both the sides, the trial Court acquitted the accused respondents for the charge under Section 452/34, 384/34, 323/34 IPC vide judgment dated 11.05.2016.

5. Feeling aggrieved, the complainant petitioner preferred an appeal before the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2 who vide order dated 06.06.2017 dismissed the appeal and affirmed the judgment dated 11.05.2016. Hence, this revision petition.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the Court below without going through the entire record and evidence wrongly acquitted the accused respondents for the offence charged against them. The court below while passing the impugned order did not consider the statements of witnesses and documents in correct perspective. It is submitted that the learned courts below has wrongly acquitted the respondents on the basis of minor contraditions in the statement of prosecution witnesses so also certain prosecution witnesses being hostile whereas, merely on the basis of testimony of hostile witnesses, it cannot be assumed that the incident did not take place. The learned courts below have also ignored the injury report Ex.P/3 of injured petitioner, which goes to show that complainant had got injured. Thus the judgment of the Courts below are liable to be set aside and the accused respondents should be convicted for the offence charged against them.

7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents vehemently opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that there is no reason to disbelieve the finding of the courts below which have rightly acquitted the respondents. He prayed that the impugned judgments and order passed by the Courts below may be sustained and the revision petition may be dismissed.

8. I have heard the counsels for the parties and gone through the entire record.

9. From the evidence on record so also finding arrived by the learned court below, it appears that the learned trial court has acquitted the accused respondents on the basis of material contradictions in the statement of the witnesses so also absence of any eye witness or recovery. The learned Trial court came to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused respondents beyond reasonable doubt. In the opinion of this Court, the findings given by the Courts below are perfectly justified and there is no illegality in the judgment of acquittal