STATE OF ORISSA Vs. PRADIP KUMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent, serving as a Tube-well Mechanic attached to the Korkonda Block, stood charged under sections 376 and 457 of the Indian Penal Code for having committed rape after breaking open the house of the victim Saibani (P.W. 6), then working as a Lady Sweepress in the Public Health Centre at the same place. On a consideration of the evidence, the learned trial Judge has found that neither of the two charges had been established.

(2.) In an appeal against acquittal, no interference is called for unless the findings recorded by the trial court are found to be unreasonable, perverse or unfounded. Even if another view can be taken in favour of the prosecution, the order of acquittal is not to be interfered with.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for both the sides. At the stage of hearing, the learned Standing Counsel has fairly and justifiably submitted that the respondent was entitled to the benefit of doubt in the facts and circumstances of the case.