In an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court should not interfere unless the judgment is patently perverse or based on a misreading of evidence; where two reasonable views are possible, the view resulting in acquittal must be sustained, particularly when the prosecution fails to explain injuries on the accused.

The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 18.12.2013 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehra, District Kangra, H.P. (learned Trial Court) vide which the respondents (accused before learned Trial Court) were acquitted of the commission of offences punishable under Sections 451, 323 and 325 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). (The parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience).

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the police presented a challan before the learned Trial Court against the accused for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 451, 323, and 325 read with Section 34 of the IPC. It was asserted that the informant Madan Singh (PW4) and the accused had gone to attend the marriage of Fuggan Singh’s son on 28.02.2009. Accused Rajinder Singh was sitting on a seat ahead of the informant’s seat. The accused abused the informant without any reason. Mehar Singh was sitting with the accused. He took out a bottle of liquor and poured it on the informant’s head. The informant objected. Rajinder Singh told the people that he would show a tamasha to them. The barat returned to the village, and everybody went to their home. The informant heard a noise of the door opening on 01.03.2009 at about 4:30 a.m. The informant woke up. He enquired as to who had opened the door. 2-3 people came to the informant's room and started beating the informant. The informant identified Amrik Singh, Arun Singh and Rajinder Singh as the assailants. Amrik Singh inflicted a fist blow on the informant’s face, and the informant's tooth was broken. Arun Singh, Amrik Singh and Rajinder Singh also gave beatings to Asha Devi (PW6), the informant’s wife. The informant shouted for help. Shakuntla Devi, Milap Singh (PW7) and Kanta Devi (PW8) reached the spot and rescued the informant and his wife. The matter was reported to the police. The police registered an FIR (Ext.PW4/A). ASI Krishan Kumar (PW9) investigated the matter. He visited the spot and prepared the site plan (Ext.PW9/A). He filed an application (Ext.PW2/A) for the medical examination of the informant Madan Singh. Dr Anuj Kumar (PW2) examined the informant and found injuries on his person. He advised the expert opinion from the Dental Surgeon. Dr Bharti Sood (PW1) examined the informant and found that he had sustained grievous injuries. She issued the MLC (Ext.PW1/B). Dr Anuj Kumar (PW2) issued a final opinion (Ext.PW2/B) stating that the nature of the injuries was grievous and that the injuries could have been caused within 12 hours of examination. The Medical Officer handed over the broken pieces of the teeth (Ext.P2 and Ext.P3) to the police official accompanying the victim. ASI Krishan Kumar (PW9) also filed an application (Ext.PW2/H) for the medical examination of Rajinder Singh, Amrik Singh and Arun Singh. Dr Anuj Kumar (PW2) examined Arun Singh and found that he had sustained a simple injury which could have been caused within 12 hours of examination. He also examined Amrik Singh and found that he had sustained simple injuries which could have been caused within 12 hours of the examination. ASI Krishan Kumar (PW9) recorded the statements of the witnesses as per their version. After the completion of the investigation, the challan was prepared and presented before the