An appellate court should not interfere with an order of acquittal unless the judgment is perverse or illegal, as the acquittal reinforces the presumption of innocence. Convictions require testimony that inspires confidence and is consistent with the surrounding facts and material evidence.

1. Appellant/prosecutrix (name withheld) has preferred the instant appeal against judgment dated 31.10.2022, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Exclusive Court for Heinous Crimes Against Women), Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri, vide which respondent Nos.2 and 3/accused Ajay Arora and Anil Kumar @ Nitin Arora respectively, have been acquitted in case FIR No.100 dated 04.08.2020, under Sections 323, 376, 406, 498-A and 506 IPC ( Sections 354-A , 354-D, 120-B IPC were added later on), registered at Police Station Women, District Yamuna Nagar.

2. Shorn off the unnecessary details, the brief facts, as per prosecution version is that marriage of the appellant was solemnized with respondent no.3 on 25.03.2018 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies and sufficient dowry was also given. However, it was alleged that the accused persons were not happy with the given dowry and used to taunt and maltreat the appellant, for which a panchayat was also convened on 19.05.2020 and as per settlement therein, the appellant started living separately on the first floor of the house, along with her daughter, but her husband did not join her and he kept living with his mother and brother. It was also alleged that respondent no.2 i.e. brother-in-law (devar) of the appellant used to keep an evil eye upon her and on 29.06.2020, at about 10:00 PM, he tried to outrage her modesty in a drunkard condition. She shouted and called her husband and mother-in-law for help, but of no avail. She locked herself in the bathroom and telephonically informed Sunil Kalra, Sanjeev Kala and Suresh Kumar about the said incident. Accordingly, the aforesaid FIR was registered on this complaint of the complainant/appellant.

3. During investigation, the complainant got recorded her supplementary statement and thereafter, offences under Sections 354-A , 354-D, 120-B IPC were added. Scaled site plan was prepared. Disclosure statements of the accused persons were recorded. Respondent no.2 and complainant were got medically examined. After completion of investigation, Challan under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was prepared and presented in the Court against both the accused persons i.e. respondents no.2 and 3.

4. Offence under Section 376 IPC, being exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri, on 18.12.2020.

5. Finding a prima facie case, accused Anil Kumar was charge-sheeted for offences punishable under Sections 498-A , 406 and 506 IPC, while accused Ajay Arora was charge-sheeted for offences punishable under Sections 376, 323 and 506 IPC, vide order dated 24.02.2021, to which both of them pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

6. As many as 10 witnesses were examined by the prosecution to prove its case. Statements of accused persons under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded while putting all incriminating evidence to him. They claimed innocence and false implication. However, no defence evidence was led by them, except some documentary evidence.

7. After considering the evidence on record, learned Trial Court found the same to be woefully insufficient to convict both the accused who were accordingly acquitted of the offences, for which they had been charge-sheeted, vide impugned judgment dated 31.10.2022.

8. Aggrieved of the said decision, present appeal has been filed by the appellant/complainant challenging acquittal of both the accused/ respondents no.2 and 3.

9. Learned counsel for