IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 99 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: October 21, 2009 Gurmito Bai … Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another. … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND. Present : Mr. M.S. Rai, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. B.B.S. Teji, AAG, Punjab, S.D. Anand, J. The petitioner prosecturix has a grievance that her plea for the conviction of the respondent-accused for the commission of offence under Section 376 IPC had been invalidly negatived by the learned Trial Judge. On that grievance, the petitioner has come up to obtain the leave of this Court to appeal against the verdict of acquittal. The learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to argue that the impugned order proceeds on a factually incorrect premise. Crl. Revision No. 99 of 2009 It is apparent from the record that the prosecution version was supported by the solitary testimony of the prosecutrix. Though she had raised a plea at the trial that the raula raised by her had attracted Surjit Singh son of Darbara Singh and further that the raula raised by the latter had also attracted her own husband Rattan Singh, the learned Trial Court noticed that neither Surjit Singh nor Rattan Singh had been produced at the trial. The former has given up as unnecessarily, while the latter was given up as having been won over by the respondent – accused. The learned Trial Court further noticed that only linear abrasions found on her cheek, forearms of the prosecutrix could have been caused by a friendly hand. The fact that the prosecutrix did not even aver to have sustained any injuries on her private parts also weighed with the learned Trial Judge for recording a finding that it all appeared to have been a consensual affair, as between the prosecutrix and the respondent – accused. I find that the reasoning recorded by the learned Trial Court, to draw sustenance for the finding of exoneration, is appropriate, acceptable and valid. The petition shall stand accordingly dismissed. Leave to appeal against acquittal shall stand declined. October 21, 2009 ( S.D. Anand ) vkd Judge 2