Point of law: In any event High Court entertained an appeal treating to be an appeal against acquittal; it was in fact exercising revisional jurisdiction. Even while exercising an appellate power against a judgment of acquittal, High Court should have borne in mind the well settled principles of law that where two view are possible, appellate Court should not interfere with finding of acquittal recorded by Court.

Headnote:
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 161, 313, 378 (3) – Indian penal code, 1860 - Sections 366, 376, 376/114 and 201 – Offence of Kidnapped and Rape – Appeal against Acquittal – Complainant (father of prosecutrix) stating that his daughter, prosecutrix aged about 14 years, was coming to home after fetching a bucket of water from well - At that time, accused was standing on balcony of her house. She called his daughter to her house. His daughter went to house of accused after giving bucket to him. After some time, his daughter came back crying. Her clothes were having blood - On hearing hue and cry, Munna Lal, Bhagwati Prasad, Deena Nath, etc. gathered there. In front of all, his daughter told entire story that Anil Kumar was already in house of accused and he forcibly caught her and tried to commit rape - She called accused to save her, but accused pushed her inside room. Then Anil Kumar committed rape with her. Subsequently, Anil and accused cleaned blood from floor of room and accused gave safe escape to Anil Kumar from backdoor of her house.
Finding of the court :
It is also a settled legal position that in acquittal appeals, appellate Court is not required to rewrite the judgment or to give fresh reasonings, when the reasons assigned by the Court below are found to be just and proper - Prosecutrix has clearly stated whatever is asked by defence counsel in cross-examination was told to investigation officer, but this is not mentioned in her statement because accused etc. had greased the palm of Investigating Officer, but in our opinion, there is no iota of evidence in this regard, rather it is clear that narration of story as told in cross-examination by prosecutrix was not told to Investigating Officer. Analysis of evidence of prosecutrix (PW1) does not inspire confidence, mainly in light of medical evidence. Prosecutrix was medically examined by Dr, who was produced before trial court as PW3. She has clearly stated in her statement that at time of internal examination of prosecutrix, she did not find any mark of injury on her private-parts. Hymen was old torn and healed. It is also stated that there was no bleeding at all. Vaginal-smear was taken by doctor for chemical examination and supplementary report on record shows that no spermatozoa were found. In this way, medical evidence does not support the version of prosecutrix at all - Learned trial court rightly appreciated evidence on record, evidence produced by the prosecution does not inspire confidence as held by learned trial Judge. Court cannot take a different view from that of taken by learned trial Judge. Court not find any infirmity in the impugned judgment and order regarding the role of accused.
Result: Appeal dismissed

JUDGMENT :

Ajai Tyagi, J.

1. This appeal, under Section 378 (3) Cr.P.C. at the behest of the State, has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 13.7.1987, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VIII, Agra, in Session Trial No.193 of 1986 (State vs. Anil Kumar and another) arising out of Case Crime No.96 of 1985 under Sections 366, 376, 376/114 and 201 IPC, Police Station-Jagdishpura, District-Agra, whereby learned trial Judge acquitted both the accused persons of all the charges.

2. Brief facts of this case are that a written-report dated 26.5.1985 was submitted by complainant, namely, Raj Narayan Sharma (father of the prosecutrix) stating that on 25.5.1985 at about 6:00-6:30 pm, his daughter, namely, the prosecutrix aged about 14 years, was coming to home after fetching a bucket of water from the well. At that time, Smt.Raj Kumari w/o Om Prakash Sharma was standing on balcony of her house. She called his daughter to her house. His daughter went to the house of Raj Kumari after giving bucket to him. After some time, his daughter came back crying. Her clothes were having blood. On hearing the hue and cry, Munna Lal, Bhagwati Prasad, Deena Nath, etc. gathered there. In front of all, his daughter told the entire story that Anil Kumar was already in the house of Raj Kumari and he forcibly caught her and tried to commit rape. She called Raj Kumari to save her, but Raj Kumari pushed her inside the room. Then Anil Kumar committed rape with her. Subsequently, Anil and Raj Kumari cleaned the blood from the floor of the room and Raj Kumari gave safe escape to Anil Kumar from backdoor of her house.

3. On the basis of above written-report, a first information report was lodged as Case Crime No.96 of 1985. Investigation was taken up by SI Bacchu Lal Verma. Investigating Officer visited the spot, prepared site-plan and statements of witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. were also recorded. During the course of investigation, medical examination of the victim was conducted and medical report as well as supplementary report were prepared. After completing the investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons, namely, Anil Kumar and Raj Kumari. The case being triable exclusively by court of session was committed to the court of session for trial by competent Magistrate. The learned trial court framed charges against accused Anil Kumar under Sections 376 and 201 IPC and against Raj Kumari under Section 376/114 and 201 of IPC. Accused persons denied charges and claimed to be tried.

4. To bring home the charges, the prosecution produced the following witnesses, namely:-

1.	Prosecutrix	PW1
2.	Raj Narayan Sharma	PW2
3.	Dr. Sudha Rani Agrawal	PW3
4.	Constable Parushuram	PW4
5.	S.I. Bacchoo Lal Verma	PW5

5. In support of the ocular version of the witnesses, following documentary evidence was produced and contents were proved by leading the evidence :-

1.	Written Report	Ex.ka1
2.	FIR	Ex.ka4
3.	Medico Legal Examination	Ex.ka2
4.	Supplementary Report	Ex.ka3
5.	Report of FSL	Ex.ka13
6.	Copy of G.D.	Ex.ka9
7.	Site-plan	Ex.ka10

6. After completion of prosecution evidence, statements of accused persons were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in which they denied the evidence and said that false evidence has been led against them. No evidence was examined in defence.

7. We have heard Shri Ashwini Prakash Tripathi, learned AGA for the State of UP as well as Shri Arvind Kumar, learned counsel for the accused respondents and perused the record.

8. Before we embark on testimony and the judgment of the Court below, the contours for interfering in Criminal Appeals where accused has been held to be non guilty would require to be discussed.

9. The principles, which would govern and regulate the hearing of an appeal by this Court against an o