Heard counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 31.08.2015 passed by the learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-I, Gumla in Sessions Trial Case No.301/2010 arising out of Raidih P.S. Case No.41 of 2010 (G.R. Case No.499 of 2010) whereby opposite party nos. 2 to 7 have been acquitted of the charges under Sections 452/366(A)/323/509/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution story as alleged in the complaint petition no.83 of 2010 filed on 31.04.2010 interalia asserts as follows:-

Complainant's daughter Kalawati Devi, aged about 15 years had gone for natural call on 2nd April, 2010. As soon as she came back to her house Baney Oraon entered and started outraging her modesty. He was in drunken condition. On objection, he started assaulting and called his companions standing outside the house namely, Ranjit Oraon, Premjit Oraon, Bairagi Oraon, Rajendra Oraon and Binod Oraon. They also started assaulting and made complainant's daughter naked. They forcefully took her outside his house. The complaint was sent to the concerned police station under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. which led to the institution of the instant F.I.R. After investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against six accused persons. Cognizance was taken under the aforesaid offences. The case was committed for trial on 29th November, 2010 by the learned S.D.J.M., Gumla to the Court of Sessions. Charges were framed under the aforesaid sections on 19th December, 2011 and read over and explained to the accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Prosecution examined five witnesses namely P.W.-1 Bigni Devi, mother of the victim girl; P.W.-2 Jhunu Oraon, the complainant; P.W.-3 Kalawati Kumari, victim girl; P.W.-4 Vishnu Oraon, a relative of informant who belonged to another village and was declared hostile; P.W.-5 Gorelal Singh, the Investigating Officer. Exhibit-1 is the signature of informant on the complaint petition; Exhibit-2 is the signature of Kalawati Kumari on the statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. on 23rd June, 2010; Exhibit-3 is the endorsement of Officer in-charge on the complaint petition. The learned trial court considered the material evidence adduced on behalf of the informant and did not find the charges proved beyond all shadow of reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the accused persons were acquitted by giving them the benefit of doubt.

4. On perusal of the impugned judgment and consideration of the submission of the counsel for the parties reveals the following important aspects of the case:-

P.W.-1 Bigni Devi, mother of the victim, has admitted in her deposition that she came one week after the alleged occurrence when the incident was narrated by her husband. She also stated that the girl went to Delhi on Sunday after one day of occurrence. She returned home from Delhi after two months. P.W.-1 was unable to tell the name of all these six accused persons, though she identified them. She admitted that Baney Oraon is the son of her husband's brother. Her daughter had gone at about 09:00 p.m. to the pond with Mahendra Oraon, a co-villager, but this witness was not present at the time of occurrence. Kalawati went to Delhi alongwith one Hema. Hema's mother has been living in Delhi for fourteen years. The case was lodged after conversation with her daughter on phone. The alleged place of occurrence (Akhra) is in the middle of the village beside which there are houses of Surju Singh and Bhaiya Ram and the house of her Bhaisur. There was a dispute with the accused persons with respect to the pump. She also accepted that there were no witnesses of the incident in her village. Learned trial court found her to be a hear say witness who could not be relied upon to support the prosecution story.

P.W.-2 Jhunu Oraon the informant and father of the victim girl in his examination-in-chief stated the date of occurrence as 2nd April, 2010. According to him, Kala