STATE OF M.P. Vs. PHOOL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State has preferred this Leave Petition, seeking permission to file appeal against the order of acquittal of the respondents 1 to 8 for the offences under sections 353 and 397, IPC.

(2.) WE have perused the impugned judgment. The learned trial Court on the consideration of the evidence led by the prosecution and also the defence of the accused -respondents concluded that the prosecution could not prove its allegations beyond the shadow of doubt, whereas the defence of the accused persons was provable that Constable Sita Ram had tried to molest and rape the wife of accused Girwar. Although the accrued persons led no evidence, but the Court has considered that when Sita Ram had appeared in the witness box, he had pleaded only ignorance and had not denied the allegation. However, the learned trial Court has taken the views Oil the consideration of overall prosecution evidence and has acquitted the accused -respondents of the charges. The view taken by the learned trial Court cannot be said to be wholly unreasonable or perverse. Now it is well settled that when two views of an incident are possible, the one which favours the accused has to be accepted by the Court and in an appeal against the order of acquittal, the order cannot be set aside even if other view was possible. As such, we have found no substance in the leave petition. It is summarily dismissed.

(3.) WITH the above observations, this petition is dismissed.