JUDGMENT Sharad Manohar, J. This is an appeal against the acquittal filed by the State Government. After going through the evidence and after hearing whatever arguments the learned Public Prosecutor, Mr. Vyas had to make, we have been convicted that if-there is any case where appeal against the acquittal should never have been filed this is the one. As a matter of fact, we are satisfied that in all probability the prosecution itself is an entirely got up affair and the accused has been framed up by the Police just with a view to make scapegoat of somebody with a view to earn laurels for themselves. 2. It is unnecessary to state the facts at length because they have been very fully and carefully stated out by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge in his judgment every part of which' we are inclined to confirm. However, for the sake of explaining our judgment a few facts may be stated briefly as follows: The accused was charged under section 302 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code for having committed rape upon one Tai alias Nibabai, daughter of Wana Sonawane, an innocent girl of 11 years. The allegation is that after raping her, he throttled her to death in order that she might not divulge the act committed by him to her relatives. 3. The prosecution case was that the victim. Taibai was the sister of Madhu Wana Sonawane. The accused is the cousin of said Madhu Wana. The allegation is that on 31st August 1980, Taibaiand Madhu Wana had gone to their field for grazing the cattle. After about noon time, Madhu came back for taking his meals telling' the accused to go and look after his bullocks. Both the accused and deceased Taibai were on the land tending the cattle. The case is that the accused took the girl to a nearby Nalla, raped her there and thereafter throttled her to death and left the body in the Nalla. He thereafter came back to the village. While returning back he was noticed by same witnesses to be in a frightened state of mind. As the-girl did not return after the evening and till night time, a search was instituted, in which search even the accused participated. - Ultimately the body of the girl was found in the Nalla at night time. The Police Patil was in formed. As the-girl did not return after the evening and till night time, a search was instituted, in which search even the accused participated. - Ultimately the body of the girl was found in the Nalla at night time. The Police Patil was in formed. The usual inquest panchnama was made. The body was sent for post-mortem. From the post-mortem report it appears that the girl was first criminally assaulted and murdered thereafter by throttling. The Police Patil made a report to the Police-Station which was recorded on the FIR. The Police Officer concerned came to the village next day that is on 1st September 1980. From 1st September 1980 to 4th September 1980, be was camping in the village itself trying to find out clues for detecting the crime. On 3rd September 1980 at 11.00 P.M. the villagers held a meeting. In the said meeting, two persons Ramesh and Tanaji, P.W. 6 and 7 asked the accused to make clean breast of everything or else the entire village might come in difficulty, because; the girl was a Harijan girl and the offence against her would assume a communal colour. When the accused refused to make any confession, these two witnesses took him aside and the prosecution case is that before these two witnesses, in privacy, the accused made a clean breast of everything. The villagers thereafter handed over the accused to the Police. It is the case of the Police that the accused volunteered to show the place of the offence and also to show the clothes that he was wearing at the time of offence and that, accordingly, he showed the place of offence and the necessary panchanma in that behalf was made. He took them to his house and from the house he took out a bundle of clothes. The allegation is that on the Kopri (banian), half-pant (underwear) and towel produced by the accused there were bloodstains. These clothes were sent to the Chemical Analyser. The nail clippings of the accused were also sent to the Chemical Analyser. Tile Chemical Analyser's report shows that the blood stains on the clothes were of the "B" group and that blood group of the deceased was also of 'B' group. It is with this case that the prosecution went for trial of the accused before the Court. 4. The accused denied each and every allegation of the prosecution. Tile Chemical Analyser's report shows that the blood stains on the clothes were of the "B" group and that blood group of the deceased was also of 'B' group. It is with this case that the prosecution went for trial of the accused before the Court. 4. The accused denied each and every allegation of the prosecution. He denied having gone with Mahadu Wana for grazing cattle. He denied that Mahadu sent his sister Taibai to the field for grazing bullocks. He denied that he tended bullocks along with deceased Taibai at any time before her death on that evening. He denied the alleged extra-judicial confession before P.W. 6 and P.W. 7. He even denied the so called discovery made by him of the blood-stained clothes. 5. The prosecution led evidence in the first place of Mahadu, whose evidence would be of quite some importance in this case if it was reliable. The substance of his evidence before the Court was that the accused and the girl Taibai were seen together near the scene of the offence just before the likely time of the offence. If this evidence was believable perhaps some basis would have been there for the circumstantial evidence relied upon by the prosecution. But as pointed out by the learned trial Judge, this most crucial fact has not been stated by Mahadu in the immediate report he made to the Police - Patil which is at Exhibit 9. In that report he has not stated that it was the accused who was with his sister deceased Taibai, at the relevant time before the offence. In fact, he has made are- reference to the fact that the accused had accompanied Mahadu for grazing the bullocks and that the accused was grazing bullocks in the land with the deceased Taibal. The other two witnesses were P. W. 6 and 7, namely Ramesh and Tanaji. These witnesses want the Court to believe that in the meeting which took place on 3rd September 1980 at 11.00 p.m. in the village, the accused was asked by the villagers to tell everything to them or else the entire village would come in trouble. These witnesses stated that they took him out from the meeting to a private place and there the accused made confession before them about his having committed the offence with which he was charged. These witnesses stated that they took him out from the meeting to a private place and there the accused made confession before them about his having committed the offence with which he was charged. The learned trial Judge has examined the evidence of these witnesses very carefully and had discussed it quite correctly. The learned Judge has found so many anomalies in the evidence; In the first place it was unintelligible as to how it was that no person in the village enquired the accused about the true state of facts, at any time before tile meeting. If Mahadu's evidence in the Court about the accused having accompanied him for tending the bullocks was correct and if his evidence that the accused and the deceased Taibai were together tending the catties for a long time was correct, then everybody would ask the first question to the accused as to what he knew about the whole matter. Contention is that these villagers kept mum about this aspect till the date of the village meeting and that in that village meeting they al1 of a sudden pounced upon the accused and asked him to make clean breast of the things. What is further puzzling about the contention is that the deceased did not make confession before the villagers; but when he was taken outside the meeting by these witnesses, P. W. 6 and 7, clandestinely as it were, he made the confession before these two witnesses as if these two witnesses had some magnetic and irresistible pull with them.-As observed by the learned Judge, the witnesses themselves have stated that in the meeting the accused was warned that if he did not make the confession, the entire village would come in trouble. This obviously means that the villagers wanted to make scapegoat of somebody and they took the accused for being the. sacrificial goat because the heinous crime committed upon the innocent girl was likely to spark off communal agitation or riot since the girl belonged to the Harijan community. From the evidence of these two witnesses it appears that these two witnesses and the other villagers successfully prevented that eventuality of the offence taking a communal hue by the convenient expedient of catching hold of one from the Harijan community itself. In addition to this oral evidence, the prosecution led evidence about the alleged discovery consists of 1. From the evidence of these two witnesses it appears that these two witnesses and the other villagers successfully prevented that eventuality of the offence taking a communal hue by the convenient expedient of catching hold of one from the Harijan community itself. In addition to this oral evidence, the prosecution led evidence about the alleged discovery consists of 1. the accused pointing out the place of offence and 2. he taking out the blood stained clothes from his house. The learned Judge dealt with this piece of evidence also. So far as the first discovery relating to the place of offence is concerned, it is a meaningless exercise on the face of it. It is impossible to understand for what purpose the police dragged the accused to the place of offence and made him point out the place when everybody knew the place by that time. As observed by the learned Judge, the Police have themselves seen the place of offense previously and by making the accused show the place of offence, no new discovery can be said to have been made by him as contemplated by section 27 of the Evidence Act. The circumstance, therefore, was rightly ruled out by the learned Judge in toto. The other circumstance, namely the blood-stained clothes being found in the possession of the accused, is also equally puzzling. Kopri (banian) half-pant (under-wear) and towel which were taken out by the accused were alleged to have blood-stains on them and the clothes were sent by the Police to the Chemical Analyser and the report of Chemical Analyser shows that the blood stains were of the 'B' group. The Chemical Analyser's report also shows that tile blood of tile deceased was of 'B' group. However, it was common ground in the trial Court as well as before us that the blood group of the accused himself was not found out by the prosecution and no attempt was made on behalf of tile prosecution to lad evidence in that behalf. The accused flatly denied having produced the banian, towel and the under-pant and having showed the spot of offence to the Police. From his answer to question No.1, it appears that he did-not deny the facts that the towel, Kopari (banian) and the under-pant belonged to him. He had, however, very good explanation for the blood stains on the said clothes. From his answer to question No.1, it appears that he did-not deny the facts that the towel, Kopari (banian) and the under-pant belonged to him. He had, however, very good explanation for the blood stains on the said clothes. He stated that the villagers beat him and that he sustained bleeding injury on his leg which accounted for the blood-stains on the clothes. The nail clippines which were alleged to be having blood of "B" group were also explained by him by the same fact that when he received the injury by virtue of the beating given to him by the villagers, his nails got smared with blood. 6. This was all the evidence led before the trial Court. It will be thus seen that there was no direct evidence of eye-witness as such and the entire prosecution case rested upon the circumstantial evidence. The circumstances relied upon by the prosecution have been correctly analysed by the learned Judge in para 13 of his judgment. The circumstances were that (1) the accused was grazing bullocks at the same place where the victim girl was tending cattle for grazing; (2) the accused was seen by some witnesses in a frightened condition when he left the land in the evening time. (3) the extra judicial confession made by the accused before the two witnesses P.W. 6 and 7. (4) the accused having pointed out the spot of offences. (5) recovery of the blood' stained clothes from the house of the accused, the blood on the clothes being of "B" group which was the blood group of the deceased. . Each of the above circumstances has been examined as being unworthy to lead to the conclusion of the guilt of the accused. As already stated above there is really no reliable evidence on the strength of which it could be said that the accused was in the company of the girl, tending the cattle, just sometime before the likely time of the offence. Mahadu's evidence in this behalf is belied by his own statement before the Police Patil. The evidence relating to the accused being in. frightened condition is meaningless evidence and the prosecution itself did not rely upon that aspect because it was not borne out by any evidence at all. Mahadu's evidence in this behalf is belied by his own statement before the Police Patil. The evidence relating to the accused being in. frightened condition is meaningless evidence and the prosecution itself did not rely upon that aspect because it was not borne out by any evidence at all. The fully belied and the trial Court rightly found the evidence of witnesses Ramesh and Tanaji, P.W. 6 and 7, to be wholly untrustworthy. The entire conduct of the said witnesses, P.W. 6 and 7, was in the first instance, very unnatural. The confession was not made in the presence of the villagers: The confession is said to have been made privately before these two witnesses who took out the accused from the meeting to a private place. Admittedly the villagers did not want to come in trouble, because, the girl who was raped and murdered was a Harijan girl and the fear was that the communal incident would flare up at any time even if a mere suspicion was placed upon any non-Harijan member of the village community. It is, therefore, more than likely that one of the Harijan men was picked up by the villagers, to be more correct by the two witnesses P.W. 6 and 7, belonging to the non Harijan part of the village community. The Police have readily fallen prey to this device of the village community. In this connection the answer given by the accused to question No. 14 put to him by the learned Judge in his examination under section 313 is quite significant. It reads as follows: Q. 14. Why Rameshand Tanaji should depose that in their presence you made statement involving yourself committing murder on Taibai and throttling her to death? Ans. police were not able to trace out the culprit and they were harassing the villagers. Villagers beat me. I am poor. Witnesses made me a scapegoat and falsely involved me." It is to be noted that this answer has come from an ignorant and illiterate Harijan villager which fact by itself, to some extent, vouches for its truth. The manner in which the Police have carried on the investigation and have brought out a framed-up charge against the accused also gives credence to his plea. 7. In this connection it is to be noted that the Police were camping in the village from 1st September 1980 to 4th September 1980. The manner in which the Police have carried on the investigation and have brought out a framed-up charge against the accused also gives credence to his plea. 7. In this connection it is to be noted that the Police were camping in the village from 1st September 1980 to 4th September 1980. This is an-admitted position. The Police were not finding out any clue for detection of the offence. The astonishing aspect of the part played by the Police is that till 3rd September 1982, not even a suspicion was raised as regards the accused. If at all Mahadu's statement was correct and he knows that the accused was the last person seen with the deceased, Taibai, just sometime be fore the likely time of the offence, it is unintelligible why the Police did not interrogate the accused all that time at all. The accused took part in the search of the deceased on the fateful night. He was not concealing himself. He had not run away from the village. He was very much there in the village all the time. He was not interrogated by the Police. But in the meeting some busy bodies out of the villagers picked up the accused to ask him point blank about the part played by him and the allegation is that he made confession before the two villagers, P.W. 6 and 7. On that basis the villagers handed over the accused to the Police and the Police thereafter proceeded with the ritual of makmg the accused to show the place of offence and of pointing out the blood stained clothes. Nothing further is done by the Police in the investigation. The investigation itself is something not very far from duress. A: significant answer is given by the Police Officer in his cross-examination. He has admitted that the accused is a married person. He states further as follows: "It is not true that I was not getting clue of real assailant and, therefore I threatened the Police Patil and Sarpanch of the village that if the real culprit is not traced out the village will come in trouble." No doubt this was only a suggestion made to him and he has denied the same. But the entire manner in which the investigation is carried out and evidence is led shows that the Police were in framing-up the accused, come what may. But the entire manner in which the investigation is carried out and evidence is led shows that the Police were in framing-up the accused, come what may. To our mind, the circumstantial evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution is thoroughly untrustworthy and. meaningless. On such evidence the accused should not have been even charge-sheeted. The evidence relating to discovery is nothing but an exercise in futility and it is astonishing that the Police indulged in such futility. To our mind, the order of acquittal passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge was the only order which could have been passed in the instant case. 8. We are grieved by the fact that after this appeal was admitted and the accused was required to give bail for being released, because of his property he could not give any bail. The result has been that he has been incarcerated in the prison for no proved fault on his part for almost a period of 3 years. We have been told that even during the trial he was in jail. But his languishing in the judicial custody during that period is at least understandable and could be said to be unavoidable. The offence for which he was being tried was a nonbailable offence and at the time it was not certain as to whether he was guilty or not. But after the clean chit was given to him by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge by passing the order of acquittal, the presumption of innocence in his favour has further reinforced it was not weakened. Still, by virtue of this futile appeal filed by the State and merely because this appeal remained pending for all this period, he was required to languish in the jail and it turns out now, once again, that no offence by him has been proved. To our mind, the Government was very much ill-advised in filing this appeal. By virtue of this appeal, untold, unjustified and unnecessary loss and suffering caused to 9n ignorant Harijan man. To our mind, the Government was very much ill-advised in filing this appeal. By virtue of this appeal, untold, unjustified and unnecessary loss and suffering caused to 9n ignorant Harijan man. To our mind, this is a case, where this Court must pass an order against the Government to pay compensation to the accused, in the first place, for having engineered a framed up and got up charge and in the second place for having preferred this appeal for having required the accused to remain incarcerated in the jail for a period of nearly 3 years. Therefore, the State must be under obligation to recompense the accused at least partially. We heard Mr. Vyas for the Government on this point and he had no answer to offer to this question put to him. The fact that we have jurisdiction for passing a suitable order in this behalf was specifically conceded before us by the learned Public Prosecutor Shri Vyas before us. In this connection it is worthwhile referring to the very phraseology employed by section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The section runs as follows: "Nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give affect to any order under this Code; or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of Justice." At first blush the section appears to be aiming merely preserving the in herent jurisdiction of the High Court proceeding upon the postulate that it already possess that jurisdiction clarifying thereby that the said jurisdiction is not the creature of that satute as such. But a closer scrutiny of the section reveals that, to some extent, it also qualifies that inherent jurisdiction. The inherent jurisdiction of this Court that is referred to is section 482 is the particular jurisdiction. (a) to give effect to any order under the Code; (b) to prevent abuse of process of any Court, or (c) otherwise to secure the ends of justice. To our mind, the power contained in clause (c) above, that is power to secure ends of justice is attracted by the facts of this case. (a) to give effect to any order under the Code; (b) to prevent abuse of process of any Court, or (c) otherwise to secure the ends of justice. To our mind, the power contained in clause (c) above, that is power to secure ends of justice is attracted by the facts of this case. Even after knowing that the evidence adduced by the prosecution against the accused was patently inadequate and unreliable, incapable of bringing home any conviction against the accused, the Government persisted in filing this appeal making the accused, his wife and possibly also children suffer for three additional years. The accused has the constitutional right of freedom; he has the right to catty on his avocation peacefully. That was denied to him with a superficial justification 714 which turns out to be illegitimate . Ends of justice do require that the Government should recompense him, atleast partially. 9. In our inherent jurisdiction under section 482 if the Criminal Procedure Code. Therefore we direct the State Government to pay a sum of Rs. 2000/-to the accused as compensation at the time when the accused is related from the jail. We also direct that the accused be set at liberty. Accused set as liberty