JUDGMENT Heard learned A.G.A. 2. This leave to appeal has been preferred against the judgment and acquittal dated 01.10.2014, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Room No. 3, Pratapgarh, in Sessions Trial No. 313 of 2013 arising out of Case Crime No. 99 of 2013, under Sections 376 I.P.C. and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Hathigawan, District Pratapgarh. 3. According to the prosecution case, first information report was lodged by Kanchan Devi, Aunty (Bua) of the victim Archana at that time who was 14 years of age with the allegation that on 31.07.2013 when the victim has gone to attend the call of nature, the accused opposite party committed rape on her. 4. Learned A.G.A. contended that the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The medical report and the statement of the victim have supported the version of first information report. Even in the examination-in-chief, when the victim was examined she again supported the version of first information report with regard to the allegation of rape against the accused opposite party. She has also explained about the injuries in her statement. However, in the cross-examination, she did not supported the prosecution case and merely on this ground, the opposite party was acquitted, hence the impugned order of acquittal is liable to be set aside. Considering the circumstances and perused the record. From perusal of the statement of the victim, it is clear that according to her statement in cross-examination under the pressure of the Station Officer and police, she gave statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate that she stated the alleged incident did not take place and no rape was committed by the opposite party. 5. Hence, in view of the fact, no interference is required in the order of acquittal as such, the leave to appeal application is liable to be rejected. Accordingly the application is rejected.