D. K. TRIVEDI, J. The present criminal appeal has been preferred by the State of U. P. against the accused respon dents for their acquittal of the charges levelled against them by order dated 28-3-1980 passed by the IVth Addl. Sessions Judge, Sitapur. The respondents were prosecuted under Sections 148, 147, 307/149, I. P. G by the police of P. S. Talgaon in connection with an incident which al legedly took place on 20-3-1974 at about 9 a. m. in village Bahadurpur H/o Kalyanpur, P. S. Talgaon, Distt. Sitapur. 2. It is said that Bishambhar Dayal is a Primary School Teacher. All the accused-respondents are also respondents of vil lage Bahadurpur and it is said that they are members of one notorious group of the village. It is said that on the date of the incident at about 9 a. m. Bishambhar Dayal was going to his school and as soon as he reached near the well situated near the house of Chhedi Lal, he was stopped by Chhedi Lal and asked not to pass thereby. It is said that on this some exchange of hot words took place and in the meantime, the other accused joined Chhedi Lal on being called by him and then Bishambhar Dayal tried to run away. It is further alleged that Ram Bilas fired his gun at Bishambhar Dayal but he escaped unhurt and on his alarm several person reached there and then the accused-persons ran away. . It is also alleged that Bishambhar Dayal was not allowed to go to the police station to lodge a report and further he somehow managed to come stealthily to Sitapur and on coming here, he sent an application about the occurrence by registered post to the Superintendent of Police, Sitapur. A case was registered on the basis of the said application and the investigation of this incident was conducted by A. S. I. Mohd. Shakur Khan. The Investigating Officer completing the investigation of this case, submitted a charge- sheet against the ac cused-persons. It may be pointed out here that a cross-case was also registered on the report lodged by Shanti Prasad and in the said case Bishambhar Dayal and others were also prosecuted under Sections 148, 147,307/149, I. P. C. 3. Shakur Khan. The Investigating Officer completing the investigation of this case, submitted a charge- sheet against the ac cused-persons. It may be pointed out here that a cross-case was also registered on the report lodged by Shanti Prasad and in the said case Bishambhar Dayal and others were also prosecuted under Sections 148, 147,307/149, I. P. C. 3. In support of its case, the prosecu tion examined as many as four witnesses, out of them P. W. 1 Bishambhar Dayal P. W, 2, Babu Ram and P. W 3 Chandrabhal are the witnesses of facts. P. W. 4 Head Con stable Deo Nath Dubey proved the G. D. entries as well as report. 4. On the other hand, the accused-persons denied the prosecution case and stated that they were falsely implicated in this ease due to enmity. 5. The learned Sessions Judge after considering the evidence on the record acquitted the accused- persons holding that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt or the accused-per sons beyond reasonable doubt. 6. Aggrieved by the said judgment and order, the State of U. P. preferred the instant appeal before this Court. There is no Counsel on behalf of the respondents to argue the case. 7. We have heard the learned Addl. Govt. Advocate and have perused the records. 8. The learned Sessions Judge while acquitting the accused-persons has given cogent reasons and we find no illegality in the said findings. The judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge is based on evidence and, therefore, the same cannot be interfered. There is a delay of two days in lodging of the F. I. R. by Bishambhar Dayal. The incident took place on 20-3-1974 at about 9 a. m. in the morning, whereas the Superintendent of Police, Sitapur received the complaint on 23-3-1974. The explanation regarding delay in lodging of the F. I. R. given by Bishambhar Dayal is that the accused-persons had not allowed them to proceed to the police station. He admits that he got typed the application in the Courts compound and he sent the same through registered post. It is also strange thing that even after preparation of the report he had not handed over the same to the office of the District Magistrate or Superintendent of Police but he sent he same through registered post. He admits that he got typed the application in the Courts compound and he sent the same through registered post. It is also strange thing that even after preparation of the report he had not handed over the same to the office of the District Magistrate or Superintendent of Police but he sent he same through registered post. Admittedly, no one has received any injury in spite of the fact that in the incident the fire-arms were used. All the witnesses examined in this case are partisan and inimical witnesses. It is also surprising that he was not assaulted or chased by the accused-persons who were 27 in numbers. He admits that there was a gun firing from the eastern side but he could not know as to who fired gun-shot from the eastern side and he did not men tion about this firing in his application Ext. Ka-2. 9. On the accused side, a report was also lodged and seven person received the gun-shot injuries. There is no explanation as to how these persons had received in juries in this case. The learned Sessions Judge after considering the testimony of the eye-witnesses recorded a finding that the testimony of all these eye-witnesses is neither convincing nor true and they are unreliable witnesses. 10. We have also perused the state ments of the eye-witnesses and in view of the facts stated above, their testimony can not be believed. 11. In the result, the present criminal appeal has no force and is hereby, dis missed. The accused- Respondents are on bail. They need not surrender. Their bail bonds are cancelled and sureties thereof stand hereby, discharge. Appeal dismissed. .