1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 562 OF 2010 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2010 The State of Maharashtra ..Applicant. V/s Sahebrao Narayan Patil. ..Respondent. Mr.A.S.Shitole, APP for State. CORAM: B.R.GAVAI, J DATE : FEBRUARY 11. 2010. P.C.: 1. This is an application for condonation of delay in filing appeal. 2. Heard the learned APP for the applicant. For the reasons stated in the application, application is allowed. Delay is condoned. 3. Appeal is taken up for hearing. Admit. 4. By the present appeal, the appellant has challenged the order dated 2 12/8/2009 passed by the learned Special Court, Sangli, thereby acquitting the accused for the offence punishable under section 3(i)(iv)(x) of the S.C. & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 read with Section 7(1)(d) of Protection of Civil Rights Act, as per Section 235 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 5. From the perusal of the Judgment passed by the learned Trial Court, it appears that learned Trial Court has found that prosecution witnesses have not supported the version of the prosecution, that the complainant was abused on the basis of the caste of the complainant. In that view of the matter, ingredient to constitute an offence under the S.C. & S.T.(Prevention of Atrocities) Act itself were absent. 6. Scope of interference in appeal against acquittal is very limited. Unless it is found that the view taken by the Trial Court is either perverse or impossible, it is not permissible for this Court to interfere with the findings of the Trial Court. No perversity or impossibility is noticed so as to warrant interference. Hence dismissed. (B.R.GAVAI,J)