JUDGMENT 1. - This is an appeal under section 374(2) Cr.RC. from the judgment and order dated May 23, 1995 whereby the learned Sessions Judge, Sawai Madhopur convicted the appellants of the offence under section 576/511 IPC and sentenced each of them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four years and also to pay a fine of rupees two thousand (Rs. 2000/-) each. 2. Briefly stated the relevant facts are that on May 22, 1991 at 1.00 A.M. PW 1 Moti Gujar of village Bhanpur under Police Station Khandar in Sawai Madhopur Distt lodged a written report Ex.P2 with the said Police Station alleging therein that in the day Smt. Kanta PW 4, Smt. Sita PW 5, Smt. Rampali PW 6 and Smt. Naini PW 7, after having finished their works at the well, had gone to take bath in Banas river, flowing near by, that when they had taken bath at about 2.00 or 3.00 PM. both the appellants reached there, caught hold of Smt. Kanta and Smt. Sita, made then lie on the sand, uplifted their ghaghra, and thus tried to commit rape on them, that the two girls raised alarms which attracted him and PW 2 Pooniya, PW 8 Ram Charan and PW 9 Dhaniya, besides several others, to the place of occurrence and they managed to save the honour and dignity of the ladies. On the basis of this report crime No.98 of 1991 under section 376/511 I.PC was registered against both the appellants. Presence of injuries on the persons of PW 4 Smt. Kanta and PW 3 Smt. Sita were confirmed by PW 5 Dr. Pritam Chand Gupta. Both the appellants were, therefore, charge-sheeted. On trial the learned Sessions Judge found both the appellants guilty of the offence under section 376/511 IPC, convicted them therefore and sentenced them in the manner stated above. 3. The learned counsel for the parties were heard and the record of the lower court was examined. 4. Sexual assault on girls and women disturb them physically and mentally. Rape not only damages them physically but also causes harm to their dignity and honour. Given to the society we live in, it brings dishonour not only to the lady concerned but also defames the entire family. 4. Sexual assault on girls and women disturb them physically and mentally. Rape not only damages them physically but also causes harm to their dignity and honour. Given to the society we live in, it brings dishonour not only to the lady concerned but also defames the entire family. Neither the concerned lady nor the elderly males in her family do generally come forward to make such false accusation which harms the personal honour dignity and respect of the lady concerned and lowers the regard and repute of her family In view of the nature of the offence, the time and occasion chosen to commit such offence, the force and deceitful means adopted and the physical disparity between the members of the opposite sexes, corroboration to the testimony of the ravished lady to base the conviction of her rapist is not necessitated. Circumstances attending naturally on the commission of offence against her may themselves provide requisite corroboration to her testimony. She is not an accomplice, she is the injured witness, an aggrieved lady. But howsoever rare there may be, cases of false accusation may still be there. Therefore, the testimony of any witness in general and of the ravished lady in particular is required to be judged in the setting of the relevant facts and circumstances of the given case. For, human nature being like that witnesses may tell alive but the natural circumstances do not. The verdict of guilty or not guilty is, therefore, to be recorded against or in favour of the person charged with the commission of an offence after taking into account the totality of all the facts and circumstances attending on the commission of the alleged offence. In cases of rape, elements of sensibility of sensitivity should be further added to the appreciation of the evidence of the witnesses. 5. In the instant case the offence of attempted rape on ladies is alleged to have been committed on the sands of a river in the early hours of the after noon of the month of May. On one side of the river side was the well 150' or 200' away from the place of occurrence, as stated by PW 3 Smt. Sita, one of the allegedly raped or attempted to be raped lady-whereat the four ladies had worked and the male members were still present. On one side of the river side was the well 150' or 200' away from the place of occurrence, as stated by PW 3 Smt. Sita, one of the allegedly raped or attempted to be raped lady-whereat the four ladies had worked and the male members were still present. On the other side of the river was the "Bari'' of one Gangadhar Keer and other persons had their Kacchas" which were being looked after by ladies and children. Sheep and goats are generally taken by the shephard to the bank of the river on witnesses side for quenching their thirst. As is to be pointed out later, there had been some incident of marpit between the witnesses and the women folk of the keers on the previous day as also on that very day, allegedly some time before the incident which is under consideration. Allegedly the two appellants had gone to the other side of the river to commit rape on the ladies, taking bath on the other side, from the hut of Gangadhar, after having crossed the river. 6. It is in the above setting of facts and the background of the case that it was alleged that while the four ladies viz. PW 3 Smt. Sita (30), PW 4 Smt. Kanta (40), PW 6 Smt. Rampali (30), and PW 7 Naini (15) were taking or had hardly taken bath in the river, the two appellants reached there from the Tapri of Gangadhar Keer, caught hold of Smt. Seeta and Smt. Kanta and committed or, in any case, attempted to commit rape on them. This version was tried to be proved at the trial of the appellants by examining nine witnesses including PW 5 Dr. Preetam Chand Gupta who stated to have observed more than nine abrasions and bruises on cheeks, breasts, hands and back of Smt. Sita Devi and more than six abrasions and bruises and an incised wound on the person of Smt. Kanta almost on the same parts of her body. Of these witnesses PW 1 Moti is the informant husband of PW 3 Smt. Sita Devi. He stated that on hearing the alarm raised by the ladies on the river he had gone to the place of occurrence alongwith others from the newly constructed well and saw the two appellants grappling with the ladies. Of these witnesses PW 1 Moti is the informant husband of PW 3 Smt. Sita Devi. He stated that on hearing the alarm raised by the ladies on the river he had gone to the place of occurrence alongwith others from the newly constructed well and saw the two appellants grappling with the ladies. He further stated that had he and other witnesses not reached the place of occurrence the appellants would have either robbed them or raped them. He admitted that on the other side of the river there were the 'Kachas' being looked after by the keer ladies and children but denied that the keer ladies were also there on the place of occurrence. He assented that he had seen his ladies lying on sand in naked condition. 7. PW 2 Pooniya though stated to have reached the place of occurrence with other from the well yet he denied that the ladies were either naked or laid by the appellants on sand. 8. PW 3 Smt. Sita stated that after having taken bath when she, her mother-in-law Smt. Kanta, and her two sisters-in-law Smt. Ramkali and Smt. Naini had put on their clothes the two appellants had reached there, that she did not know them from before, that one of them caught hold of her and though tried to rape her but could not, that her sisters-in-law then called the villagers who belaboured the appellants. 9. PW 4 Smt. Kanta stated that the two appellants, after catching hold of her and her daughter-in-law Smt. Sita, took them to the water but her daughter Ramkali and Naina raised alarm which attracted the male witnesses to the spot. She further stated that she was not raped but her daughter-in-law Smt. Sita was. In cross-examination she admitted that after they had put on their cloths, Gangadhar Keer and his women folk had reached them and picked up a quarrel with them and that soon after that the two appellants had sexually assaulted her and her daughter-in- law. 10. PW 6 Smt. Ramkali stated that when she and other ladies had taken off their cloths in order to take bath in the river, the two appellants had reached there and did commit rape on Smt. Kanta and Smt. Seeta. 10. PW 6 Smt. Ramkali stated that when she and other ladies had taken off their cloths in order to take bath in the river, the two appellants had reached there and did commit rape on Smt. Kanta and Smt. Seeta. She further stated that on hearing the alarm raised by her and Smt. Naini, her father and others present at the well and thereafter almost the entire village reached there. In cross-examination she admitted that on that very day there had been a quarrel between the keers and the prosecution witnesses and the villagers had settled the dispute. She further stated that the villagers had even beaten the appellants. PW 7 Naini stated in the same tone and admitted that on that very day there had been a quarrel between Gangadhar Keer and the prosecution witnesses. 11. All the above mentioned six witnesses belong to one and the same family. 12. PW 8 Ram Charan and PW 9 Dhaniya are the two independent witnesses in this case but they have not supported the prosecution case. 13. The plea taken by the two appellants in their defence was that since they had intervened in the quarrel between the Keers' and the prosecution witnesses, they were not only assaulted by the witnesses but were also falsely implicated in this concocted case. In support of such a version they examined DW1 Kishna who stated that the appellants had never quarrelled with the witnesses and that there had been a quarrel with the keers and since the appellants were there at the Dhani of the Keers, they were also beaten by the villagers. The testimony of this witness was not at all challenged by the prosecution. 14. Now considering the entire prosecution evidence in this case in the setting of facts and circumstances of the case it is not difficult to conclude that the accusation levelled against the two appellants was totally false and frivolous knowingly made against them for their having been with the Keers at the time when the prosecution witnesses and other villagers had picked up a quarrel with Gangadhar Keer. It is fully established on record that the well of the prosecution witnesses was being constructed on their side of the bank of the river and the ladies had worked for the day on that well. It is fully established on record that the well of the prosecution witnesses was being constructed on their side of the bank of the river and the ladies had worked for the day on that well. The male members of their families were very much there and the well was not too far away from the place where the ladies had allegedly gone to take a bath. It is also established on record that the Keers had their 'bar and kachhas' on the other side of the river bank. It is also there in the evidence that Gangadhar Keer had his but there and that the Keers had their kachhas' raised in the bed of the river. Their ladies and children used to look after the kachas'. It is a matter of any body's common knowledge that in the month of May water-melon, kakris, kharboosas etc. are grown in the sandy land of river side and the vegetable growers, who usually do not own agricultural land of their own grow these seasonal fruits under kachhas'. It is not difficult to infer from the quarrel between the Keer ladies and the ladies of the prosecution side, which quarrel is stated to have taken place a day earlier as also on the fateful day, that the cause for such quarrel was, in all probability the damage caused to the crop of seasonal fruits of the Keers on the other bank of the river by the ladies of the prosecution witnesses and possibly the male members also. The prosecution witnesses were constructing their well 50 or 200 feet away from the bank on their side and the seasonal fruits on the other side could have reasonably attracted them, thus giving rise to the fight between them and the Keers on the previous day. The appellants are stated to be at the hut of Gangadhar keer. They were undisputedly beaten by the prosecution witnesses and other villagers for the probable reason that they were there with the Keers. When these probable facts are kept in view it becomes crystal clear that the appellants and for that matter and body else, could have hardly dared to commit rape on the prosecution ladies who were so near to their menfolk at the well but also in the open view of the other side of the river-bank. When these probable facts are kept in view it becomes crystal clear that the appellants and for that matter and body else, could have hardly dared to commit rape on the prosecution ladies who were so near to their menfolk at the well but also in the open view of the other side of the river-bank. The theory of the prosecution was touching the level of absurdity and on the face of it unbelievable. The prosecution witnesses had simply cooked up a false case against the present appellants only to save their own doings and wrong done to the Keers and the appellants. The prosecution case deserve to be rejected even at the first sight. In view of the highly improbable and unnatural character of the prosecution theory the medical evidence in this case affords no corroboration to the unreliable and untrustworthy evidence of the prosecution witnesses, as the possibility of the injuries, noticed on the bodies of PW 3 Smt. Sita and PW 4 Smt Kanta, being self-inflicted or sustained otherwise cannot be ruled out. 15. In the result the impugned judgment and order are set aside and both the appellants acquitted of the offence under section 376/511 IPC and their convictions and sentences therefore are set aside. Both the appellants are reported to be in jail. They shall be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case. 16. The appeal stands allowed.> Appeal dismissed. *******