ORDER : ANANT S. DAVE, J. 1. This application under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “the Code”) seeking leave to appeal is preferred by the applicant-original complainant in view of acquittal ordered by learned 3rd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vadodara in Sessions Case No. 22 of 2015 and as per judgment and order dated 30.12.2016 the accused came to be acquitted of the offences under Section 376, 504, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. As per the case of the prosecution while the applicant-prosecutrix was at her home sleeping with her children, and her husband had gone to agricultural field during the night hours at 11 O' Clock on 18.8.2014, by administering threat to kill children of the prosecutrix, the accused committed rape and accused nos. 2, 3 and 4 threatened the prosecutrix and her husband that if complaint is filed before police they would be burnt alive. Accordingly, complaint being C.R No. 50/2014 came to be registered. At the end of investigation, charge sheet was filed under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and as case was triable by the learned Sessions Judge, it was committed to the Court of Sessions by learned JMFC. Upon examining 13 oral and 17 documentary evidence, the trial Court dis-believed the case of the prosecution as it was not proved beyond reasonable doubt. 3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and order of acquittal for the offences, as above, the applicant-prosecutrix-original complainant has preferred this application. 4. Mr. M.R Bukhari, learned advocate appearing for Mr. S.K Bukhari has strenuously contended that learned Judge has failed to appreciate testimonies of prosecutrix, PW-7 at Exh.26, PW-8, Jagdishbhai-husband of the prosecutrix, Exh.29, with corroboration appears on record in the form of medico-legal evidence and doctors Biren Pandya, PW-10, Exh.32, Dr. Yogeshbhai Chandrakant Parmar, PW-11, Exh.39 and reports available in the form of receipts of muddamal to Forensic Science Laboratory and serological report about mark A-1, A-2 and A-3 i.e the clothes put on by the victim, Exh.45 and 47 respectively, will go to show that the crime so alleged for which charge was framed was not only established but proved beyond reasonable doubt and learned trial Judge ought to have held accused guilty of such crime. 4.1 Learned counsel for the applicant would contend that since threat to kill children as well as prosecutrix and her husband was administered initially by accused no. 1 and later on by accused nos. 2, 3 and 4, and considering the consequence of such complaint and social stigma attached to a victim of rape, though incident was disclosed before the husband earlier no complaint was filed. After the threat receded and prosecutrix and her husband mustered courage to lodge the complaint, delay of five days has occurred which cannot have any relevance for not believing the case. Learned advocate for the applicant has invited our attention to the statement initially made by the prosecutrix and examination in chief of PW-10, Exh.32, Dr. Biren Pandya, who was serving as the Medical Officer at Primary Health Center, Tundav and when the victim was presented by the investigating agency on 25.8.2014, the incidence was narrated about the crime that she was subjected to rape by administering threat and at the point of knife. That her testimony, according to learned counsel for the applicant, shows the version of the prosecutrix before independent witness and likewise PW-11, Dr. Yogesh Parmar, Exh.39, who was serving as Gynecologist at SSG Hospital, Vadodara, where the prosecutrix was sent for further examination also supports her case about forcible rape by accused no. 1 at the knife point. In addition to above, according to learned advocate for the applicant when prosecutrix herself has deposed about incidence and so supported by her husband, PW-8, such testimonies are credible and no suspicion can be raised about truthfulness as it inspires confidence and ought to have been believed. In a case like the crime attracting Section 376 of IPC, it is the duty of the Court not to seek any corroboration and version of the prosecutrix is sufficient to bring home the guilt of the accused and to punish him. Therefore, it is submitted that leave, as prayed for, be granted so that appeal which has merit be considered for hearing finally. 5. We have gone through the material on record available and judgment and order of acquittal passed by learned trial Judge in which evidence oral as well as documentary is discussed threadbare. Beginning with medical evidence relied on by learned advocate for the applicant. 5. We have gone through the material on record available and judgment and order of acquittal passed by learned trial Judge in which evidence oral as well as documentary is discussed threadbare. Beginning with medical evidence relied on by learned advocate for the applicant. PW-10, Exh.32 reveal medical examination of victim, which reveal absence of any injury or remnant of semen and further reference to certificate of SSG Hospital again refer to such examination and ultimate report received at Exh.47 nowhere connect the accused with the crime. Besides both the doctors nowhere state about forcible physical relationship and even version of the prosecutrix is such that it is not inspiring any confidence inasmuch admitted fact remains that when she was subjected to rape three children about 13 years, 12 years, 8 years were also sleeping with her and no shouts or resistance of any kind was raised and version put forth about administering threats again is not borne out since none of the child witness is examined. On the contrary, testimonies of victim, particularly in cross-examination, reveal about voluntary act on her part and probably when her husband returned from the agricultural field, it was seen by him and the incidence has taken colour of crime for which the complaint is registered. The serological report, particularly about mark A-1, A-2 and A-3 i.e the clothes put on by the victim do not reveal any blood or semen, so is the case about inner-wear put on by the victim. Blood group of the victim is B, while blood group of the accused is AB and there is no further analysis in the serological report. The prosecutrix while awake and capable to resist any kind of forcible attempt, comes out with different version from time to time and the circumstances narrated by us, which remain undisputed about presence of three grown-up children, make us to agree with the reasoning, finding and conclusion of the learned trial Judge of not proving the case by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt warranting no interference in the judgment and order of acquittal for the offences for which the accused were charged. It goes without saying that in an appeal preferred under Section 378 read with Section 383, even if another view is possible on appreciation of evidence by the appellate Court, it is not open for the appellate Court to reverse acquittal unless it is found so perverse and inherently contradictory to Law of Evidence, so is not the case in the present matter. Accordingly, this application for leave to appeal is rejected.