1` IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application (APPA) No. 12/2010 The State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer, Arvi vs. Ashok Uttamrao Bhamudre. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's or directions and Registrar's orders. Orders. CORAM : A.P.Lavande & P.D.Kode,JJ DATE : 11.01.2010 Heard Mr. J.B. Jaiswal, learned A.P.P. for the appellant. By the application the learned A.P.P. Seeks leave to appeal against the Judgment and order of acquittal dated 12th May, 2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha in Special Case No. 10/2007 acquitting the respondent of the offences punishable under Sections 376 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(1)(xii) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. According to the prosecution, the prosecutrix belonging to Scheduled Caste was raped by the respondent on 18.1.2007. During trial the prosecution examined nine witnesses and the accused examined one witness in his defence. The prosecution did not examine the prosecutrix. The 2` learned trial Court found that the other evidence led by the prosecution did not inspire confidence and was not sufficient to connect the accused with the crime. Perusal of the Judgment discloses that the findings given by the trial court are based on appreciation of the evidence led by the prosecution and the accused. The view taken by the learned trial Court while acquitting the respondent- accused can not be said to be perverse warranting interference in appeal against acquittal. The view taken by the learned trial court is a probable and possible view. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court no case is made out for interference. In our considered opinion, the reasons given by the learned trial Court for recording acquittal of the respondent for the offences for which he was charged can not be said to be illegal. In view of the above, we find no ground to grant leave to appeal against the acquittal. Accordingly, the application is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE patle 3`