Crl. R No. 1942 OF 2010 ****** Janak Raj vs State of Haryana and others Present : Mr. Deipa Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. ******* This is a petition against the order dated 10.3.2010 acquitting respondents No.2 to 7 of the charges under Sections 323, 341, 342, 364-A, 376(G), 395, 506, 411, 120-B of the IPC, and Section 3(i)(xi) of the SC/ST Act. The allegations are that the complainant and his wife were first abducted, then the wife of the complaint was raped and thereafter they were released. Counsel for the petitioner has argued that each of the conclusions of the trial Court can be substituted by an opposite conclusion of the same evidence. Be that as it may, counsel for the petitioner has taken me through the findings of the Court below. Even though by some reasoning the conclusions drawn by the trial Court can be substituted by opposite conclusions yet, in my considered opinion, the conclusions drawn by the trial Court cannot be said to be unrelated to the evidence led before it or arbitrary in any manner. Consequently, this petition is dismissed. ( AJAY TEWARI ) March 14, 2011. JUDGE `kk'