1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No. 1952 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 27.8.2009 *** Anita Rani .. Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab & Ors. .. Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR, Present:- Ms. Reena Bains, Advocate for the petitioner. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. The petitioner-complainant is questioning the legality of the judgment dated 3.1.2009 passed by the learned trial Court to the extent it acquitted respondents No.3 to 6 and has also sought enhancement of sentence of respondent No.2 under Section 323 IPC from six months, as awarded by the learned trial Court. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and going through the paper book, this Court is of the considered opinion that no ground to interfere with the acquittal of respondents No.3 to 6 is made out. The contradictory version initially given to the police wherein the involvement of respondents No.3 to 6 was not mentioned, from that of the complaint got instituted by the complainant naming them as also participant in the alleged commission of offence and causing injuries to her, which too was found inconsistent with the medical evidence produced by the prosecution wherein only a single injury was found on the person of the complainant, the learned trial Court rightly disbelieved the complainant to the extent of complicity of respondents No.3 to 6 in the alleged commission of offence. The High Court ought not to interfere with the order of acquittal unless the judgment of acquittal is perverse or highly unreasonable. In the instant case, the judgment of acquittal rendered by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class is neither perverse nor unreasonable and it cannot be said that the 2 trial court based its findings on irrelevant or inadmissible evidence. So far as inadequacy of sentence imposed upon respondent No.2 is concerned, it is not a proper forum and stage to question the same since any observation made by this Court definitely affect the appeal of respondent No.2 which he must have filed before the Court of Session, challenging his conviction and sentence. In the circumstances, the instant revision petition, being without merit, is accordingly dismissed. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE August 27,2009 Jiten