JUDGMENT 1. 1. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned trial Judge acquitting the accused of the offences with which he was charged. 2. The position of law in relation to interference in the matter of acquittals ordered by court of competent jurisdiction is well settled and unless the findings given by the learned trial Judge for recording acquittal are perverse or palpably wrong and cannot at all be supported by the evidence as it stands on record, interference by the appellate court, merely on the possibility of another conclusion on re-appreciation of evidence is possible, should not be undertaken. 3. It is after keeping in mind this position of law regarding interference in the matter of acquittal that we will have to examine the order of acquittal in the present case with the able assistance of the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the accused we have carefully gone through the record and proceedings of this case and we re-appreciated the evidence on record. We have scrutinised the judgment of the trial court regarding reasons for acquittal and we find ourselves in agreement with the reasons recorded by the learned Judge on appreciation of the evidence on record. Since we are in agreement with the finding of acquittal recorded by the learned Judge as also reasons given by him, we see no reason to separately repeat our application of evidence and repeat the reasons for upholding the acquittal. Suffice it to say that the order of the learned Judge acquitting the accused is well reasoned order on appreciation of evidence. Hence, the appeal fails and is dismissed.Appeal Dismissed-acquittal Upheld. *******